Rail + Property Development: A model of sustainable transit finance

and urbanism
Robert Cervero and Jin Murakami
WORKING PAPER

May 2008

Rail+PropertyDevelopment
AModelofSustainableTransitFinanceandUrbanism

RobertCerveroandJinMurakami

Authors
Robert Cervero is Professor and Chair of the Department of City and Regional Planning,
University of California, Berkeley. Professor Cervero teaches and conducts research in the area
of sustainable transportation policy and planning. He has been an advisor and consultant on
transport projects in many countries, most recently in China, Colombia, Brazil, the Philippines,
and Indonesia. He is the author of six books related to transportation and land-use integration,
including The Transit Metropolis (recently translated into Chinese) and Transit Villages for the
21st Century. In 2004, Professor Cervero was the first-ever recipient of the Dale Prize for
Excellence in Urban Planning Research and also won the 2003 Article of the Year award from
the Journal of the American Planning Association.
Jin Murakami is currently a doctoral student in the Department of City and Regional Planning,
University of California, Berkeley. Prior to this, he worked as a transportation planner and
engineering in Yokohama, Japan, conducting work on the economic impacts of beltways and
other transportation infrastructure. Jins dissertation at Berkeley will involve a comparative
analysis of infrastructure in global cities of eastern Asia, including Hong Kong, Tokyo, and
Singapore.

TableofContents

PartI.Rail+PropertyDevelopmentinHongKong

ChapterOne:MTRCorporationsRail+Property
DevelopmentApproach3
1.1Introduction3
1.2RailwayServicesinHongKong5
1.3MTRCandPropertyDevelopment7
1.4R+P:HowitWorks10
1.5TheR+PDevelopmentProcess15

ChapterTwo:R+PasTransitOrientedDevelopment21
2.1TransitOrientedDevelopmentandSustainableUrbanism21
2.2TODinaRegionalContext22
2.3The5DsofTOD23
2.4TODasPlacemaking26
2.5UrbanTODsandJointDevelopment30

PartII.AnalysisofR+P:Typologies,CaseStudies,
PerformanceImpacts,andRegionalContext35

ChapterThree:R+PandStationAreaTypologies:
BuiltEnvironmentsandHousingDevelopment37
3.1TypologiesofR+PProjects37
3.2R+PTypology:BuiltEnvironments37
3.3StationAreaTypology:HousingPatterns40
3.4TypologiesandRidershipPerformance46

ChapterFour:CaseStudiesofR+PProjects:
UrbanDesignandPartnershipArrangements51
4.1CaseSitesandDataCollection51
4.2R+PCases53
4.3NonR+PCases63
4.4CaseStudySummary:LessonsonUrbanDesign65

4.5InsightsintoR+PPartnershipArrangements70

ChapterFive:CorridorAnalysisofR+PProjects73
5.1GrowthandTravelAlongMTRsNewRailLines73
5.2CorridorComparisonsofR+PBuiltEnvironments75
5.3RidershipPatterns78

ChapterSix:R+PandTOD:
InfluencesofRidershipandHousingPrices81
6.1AnalyticalChallenges81
6.2R+P,TOD,andRidership82
6.3R+P,TOD,andHousingPrices88

ChapterSeven:R+PinaRegionalContext103
7.1VisioningHongKongsFuture103
7.2GuidedDecentralization103
7.3BalancedGrowth107
7.4TransitPrioritiesandPedestrianization108
7.5RecentandEmergingRegionalPlans109

PartIII.ComparativeExperiencesandExtensionofR+P113

ChapterEight:ComparativeExperiencesinTokyo
andSingapore115
8.1Geographies,Economies,andDemographics115
8.2WorldClassRailwaySystems119
8.3DevelopmentStrategiesandRailways125
8.4RailwayFinanceandPerformance133
8.5TODCaseStudies145
8.6Summary162

ChapterNine:LessonsandExtensions169
9.1SummaryandInsights169
9.2ExtensionsoftheR+PModel171

ii


PartI
Rail+PropertyDevelopmentinHongKong

HongKongsprincipalrailoperator,theMTRCorporation(MTRC),has
advancedthepracticeoftransitvaluecapturemorethananypublictransport
organizationworldwide.IthasdonesothroughitsRail+Property
developmentapproach,orR+P.ChapterOneexaminestheevolutionand
implementationofR+Psinceitsinceptioninthemid1980s.TheroleofMTRCas
masterplannerofstationareadevelopmentandtheprocessintroducedtoshare
risksandrewardsamongpublicandprivatestakeholdersarediscussed.
ChapterTwodiscussedR+Pasaformoftransitorienteddevelopment(TOD).
Throughgoodqualityurbandesignandattentiontotheneedsofpedestrians,
concentratinggrowtharoundstationscannotonlyhelpfinancecapital
infrastructurebutcanalsocontributetoplacemakingandcommunity
enhancement.

ChapterOne

MTRCorporations
Rail+PropertyDevelopmentApproach

1.1Introduction

HongKongisinternationallyknownforitssuccessfulintegrationofrailtransit
investmentsandurbandevelopment.Thecitysexceptionallyhighdensities,
andthemanyagglomerationbenefitsthathaveresulted,couldnothavebeen
achievedwithoutworldclassrailwayservices.HongKongisalsooneofthefew
placesintheworldwherepublictransportmakesaprofit.Thisisdueinlarge
parttotheintegratedrailpropertydevelopmentmodel,orR+Pforshort.
ImplementedbytheMTRCorporation(MTRC),theowneroperatorofthecitys
largestrailservice,theR+Pmodelisoneofthebestexamplesanywhereof
applyingthevaluecaptureprincipletofinancerailwayinvestments.1Given
thehighpremiumplacedonaccesstofast,efficientandreliablepublictransport
servicesinadense,congestedcitylikeHongKong,thepriceoflandnearrailway
stationsisgenerallyhigherthanelsewhere,sometimesbyseveralordersof
magnitude.Theowneroperatorofthetransitsystemcanrecoupthecostof
investinginrailtransitandeventurnaprofitfrompropertydevelopment,ashas
beenthecaseinHongKong.R+PhasbeenMTRCchiefinstrumentfordoing
this.

ThisreportexaminestheR+Papproachtorailwayfinanceanditslargerrolein
buildingstationareacommunitiesandshapingregionalgrowth.Asdiscussed
later,thewordapproachisusedbecauseR+Pismorethananendproductof
brickandmortaratopsubwaystations;rather,itisacarefullyconceived
processforplanning,supervising,implementing,andmanagingstationarea
developmentandtappingintothelandpriceappreciationthatresults.And
R+Psreachextendsbeyondthewalkingcatchmentsofstations.Itsrolein
shapingthecityandsurroundingshasgainedimportanceasHongKong
continuestotransformfromapreindustrialcolonialsettlementtoadynamic
globalurbancenter.WiththerestructuringofHongKongseconomytowarda
serviceandinformationbasedeconomy,railwayinvestmentshavegainedall
themoreimportanceinspatiallychannelingurbangrowthandrecyclingformer
industrialland.
TheothermajorrailwayserviceavailableinHongKongistheKowloonCanton
Railway(KCR).
1


Thereportisorganizedasfollows.First,theR+Papproachanditsevolutionare
discussed,asameansoffinancingcapitalinfrastructure,creatingviable
neighborhoodsaroundstations,andshapingurbangrowth.Next,acaseismade
thatR+PrepresentsanimportantformofTransitOrientedDevelopment(TOD)
aswellasTransitJointDevelopment(TJD).ConnectedtothisisR+Pasatoolfor
placemaking.ChapterThreeisdevotedtobuildingandpresentingseveral
typologiesofR+Pprojects.Notably,R+Pprojectsaredistinguishedintermsof
theirbuiltenvironments,housingtypes,andridershippatterns.Also,the5
Ds(density,diversity,design,distancetotransit,anddestinationaccessibility)
areintroducedasabasisforclassifyingR+Pprojectsbasedonbuilt
environments.

Incarryingoutthework,itbecameevidentthatwhatwasmissingfromthe
quantitativeassessmentandclassificationofR+Pprojectswasinsightsintothe
qualityoftheurbanenvironment,bothonsiteandnearsitenotably,factors
likeeaseofwalking,aesthetics,andthepresenceofpublicamenities.Case
studieswerecarriedouttofillthisvoid,focusingonurbandesignqualitiesand
walkabilitymeasuresforR+P,nonR+Prailwaystations,andevenareaswithout
MTRservices.Inadditiontothesedesigndiscussions,ChapterFouraddresses
thepublicprivatepartnershiparrangementsbehindthecasestudyR+Pprojects
fordifferentphasesofdevelopment.SincenewergenerationR+Pprojectsdiffer
considerablyfromearlierones,particularlywithregardtourbandesign,Chapter
FivesupplementsthecaseworkbyexaminingexperienceswithR+Pand
ridershippatternsalongthreedifferentcorridorsthatcorrespondtodifferent
phasesofMTRexpansion:theoriginalurbanlines,themorerecentTungChung
linethatextendstoHongKongsnewinternationalairport,andthemostrecent
TseungKwanOextension(focusedonredevelopingindustrialzoneswith
residentiallybasednewtowns).

ThesixthChapterofthereportisdevotedtoassessmentspecifically,the
influencesofR+PaswellasTODdesignsonMTRridershipandrealestate
prices.TheridershipanalysisfocusesonthedegreetowhichR+Pprojects
producearidershipbonusatstationsandwhetherprojectsbuiltaccordingto
TODprinciplesenjoyevenalargerbonuseffect.Modelingthemanyfactorsthat
affecthousingpricesinacomplexanddynamicrealestatemarketlikeHong
Kongsisachallengingtask.FollowupworkshouldbecarriedoutasMTRCs
portfolioofR+Pprojectsexpandandarichertimeseriesisavailableforstudying
performanceimpacts.

ChapterSevenlooksattheroleofR+Pinpromotinglargerlanduseand
transportationobjectivesfortheHongKongmetropolitanarea.The
contributionsofR+Pinadvancingsuchexpressedplanningobjectivesasjobs
housingbalance,stimulatingredevelopmentofformerindustrialzones,and
increasedpedestriantravelareaddressed.

Lastly,thereportexaminesexperienceswithpublictransportfinanceand
transport/landuseintegrationintwootherlarge,railservedAsianmetropolises:
TokyoandSingapore.Bothcityregionsboasthighlysuccessfulrailwayservices
thatarefinanciallysolvent,thoughfordifferentreasons.BothalsofeatureTOD
builtforms,thoughtherolesofpublictransportoperatorsinlanddevelopment
differmarkedlyfromHongKongsexperiences.Thereportendswith
discussionsonkeylessonsandthepotentialtransferabilityoflessonsdrawn
fromallthreeAsiansettingsHongKong,Tokyo,andSingaporetofast
growingcitiesofmainlandChinawhichcurrentlyhaveorarecontemplating
largescalerailtransitsystems.

ThisisnotthefirstindepthstudyofMTRCsR+Pprogramme.TheHongKong
PolytechnicUniversityproducedaninformativereportontheR+Pmodelinlate
2004,focusingontheprogrammesinstitutionalcontext.2Ourstudyaimsto
builduponthisworkthroughclassifyingR+Pprojects,probingmoredeeplythe
connectionsbetweenR+Pandridershipaswellasregionalplanningobjectives,
andcomparingHongKongsexperienceswithpeerAsiancitiesinhopesof
constructivelyinformingpolicymakinginrapidlygrowingcitiesofChinaand
otherpartsoftheindustrializingworld

1.2RailwayServicesinHongKong

HongKonghasahighlydevelopedandsophisticatedpublictransportnetwork,
whichincludestwohighcapacityrailways,trams,buses,minibuses,andferries.
Over90%ofallmotorizedtripsinHongKongarebypublictransport,the
highestmarketshareintheworld(Lam,2003).MTRCitselfoperatessolely
passengerrailservices.TheMTRrailwayalignmentrunsthroughthedensest
partsoftheterritorymainlytheflattercoastalareas,includingtheextremely
densenorthernshorelineofHongKongislandandtheKowloonpeninsula.
Figure1.1.showsMTRCsnetworkasofmid2007.
BSTang,YHChiang,ANBaldwinandCWYeung,StudyoftheIntegratedRailProperty
DevelopmentModelinHongKong,TheHongKongPolytechnicUniversity,2004.
2


Figure1.1.MTRCRailwayNetwork,mid2007

Historically,MTRCwasoneoftworailoperatorsthatservedHongKong,the
otherbeingtheKowloonCantonRailwayCorporation(KCRC).InDecember
2007,thetwocompaniesmergedunderthenameofMTRC.Thismerger
combinedMTRCs91km,sixraillineservicewiththeformerKCRC35km
network(thatlinkedareasoftheNorthernTerritoriesunservedbyMTRwith
lowerKowloon).SincethisreportfocusesonMTRCsexperienceswithR+P
programmeasofmid2007,allstatisticspresentedarepriortomerger.With53
stations,inmid2007theMTRnetworkaveragedastationevery1.6kms,making
upofthefinestgrainedrailwaynetworksanywherenotunexpectedlygivenit
servestheworldsdensestcity(exceeding55,000inhabitantspersquarekmin
partsofKowloon).3In2006,MTRserved25.2percentofallpublictransporttrips
madewithintheHongKongterritory,includingthosebybus,minibus,ferries,
andtrams,amarketsharethathassteadilyincreasedinrecentyears.

Thecombinationofhighurbandensitiesandhighqualitypublictransport
serviceshasnotonlyproducedthehighestleveloftransitusageintheworld
(570annualpublictransporttripspercapita),buthasalsosubstantiallydriven
downthecostofmotorizedtravel.In2002,overhalfofallmotorizedtripsmade
byHongKongresidentswereahalfhourorless(ARUP,2003).Figure1.2shows
thatmotorizedtravelconsumes,onaverage,around5percentofHongKongs
GrossDomesticProduct(GDP).Thiscontrastssharplywithmoreautomobile
orientedcitieslikeHoustonandMelbourne,whereupwardsofoneseventhof
3

http://www.aviewoncities.com/hongkong/hongkongfacts.htm

16

Cost of all journeys to the community (as % of GDP)

14

Cost of all motorized

trips as % of GDP

12
10

% of GDP

8
6
4
2
0
Houston

Melbourne

London

Paris

Vienna

Munich

Tokyo

Hong Kong

Figure1.2.ComparisonofCostofMotorizedTravelasaPercentof
4
GrossDomesticProduct(GDP)AmongGlobalCities.Source:UITP/ISTP

MillenniumCitiesDatabaseforSustainableTransport

GDPgoestotransportation.HongKongresidentsenjoytravelcostsavingseven
incomparisontomuchlargerglobalcitieswithextensiverailwaynetworks,like
LondonandParis.

1.3MTRCandPropertyDevelopment

MTRCscentralmissionistoconstruct,operate,andmaintainamodern,safe,
reliable,andefficientmasstransitrailwaysystem.4Servingaquarterofall
publictransporttripswithinHongKongandconnectingtheregionslargest
activitycentersincludingthenewinternationalairport,MTRplaysanintegral
andincreasinglyimportantmobilityroleinthespecialterritoryofHongKong.
Therailwayhasalsoplayedavitalcityshapingrole.In2002,around2.8million
people,or41%ofHongKongspopulation,livedwithin500mofanMTRstation
(Tangetal.,2004).Oneinfivehouseholdslivedwithin200mofastation.

MTRC,2005AnnualReport

Clearly,MTRstationshavebeenmagnetsinattractinggrowth.

MTRCandR+P

MTRCmakesitclearinitsAnnualReportsandothercorporatedocumentsthatit
operatesoncommercialprinciples,financingandoperatingrailwayservicesthat
arenotonlyselfsupportingbutalsothatyieldanetreturnoninvestment.
Propertydevelopmenthasbeenthechieftoolforgeneratingrevenuesthatcover
thecostsofconstructingrailwayimprovementsandprovidenetprofits.MTRCs
philosophyisthatarailwayalonecannotprovideadequatecommercialreturn
andonlythroughpropertydevelopmentcanthecompanyattractprivate
investorsandremainfinanciallysolvent.Effectively,thefullyloadedcostsof
publictransportinvestments,operations,andmaintenancearecoveredby
supplementingfaresandotherrevenueswithincomefromancillaryrealestate
developmentwhateconomistscallvaluecapture.5Sincelandparcelsnear
railwaystationsindense,trafficchokedcitieslikeHongKongarehighlyvalued,
thetransitagencycapturesthesebenefitsthroughlandleasesandsalestoprivate
interests.AsrevealedintheMissionStatementofMTRCsPropertyDivision,
valuecaptureisonlypartofthegoal;creatinghighquality,viablecommunities
andenhancingstationareaenvironmentsisalsoimportant(Figure1.3).

Throughoutthe1980sand1990s,theHongKongSpecialAdministrativeRegion
(HKSAR)governmentwasthesoleownerofMTRC.IntheFallof2000,about
23%ofitsshareswereofferedtoprivateinvestorsonthestockexchange.The
presenceofprivateshareholdersexertedastrongmarketdisciplineonMTRC,
promptingthecompanymanagerstobecomemoreentrepreneurialand
businessminded.TheratchetingupoftheR+Pprogrammeinrecentyears
reflectsMTRCsstrongmarketorientation.However,HKSARsmajority
shareholderstatusensuresMTRCweighsthebroaderpublicinterestinitsday
todaydecisions.Consequently,R+Pisnotonlyafinancialmodelbutalsoatool
forservingbroadertownplanningobjectives,likepromotingTOD.Today,
HongKongMTRisoneofthemostsuccessfulbuildoperatemaintain
transportationsystemsanywhere,courtesyofR+P.

R+P,andvaluecapturemoregenerally,ishardlyanewconcept.Itwas
successfullyappliedintheUnitedStateswelloveracenturyagotofinanceurban
Besidesdesigning,building,constructionandoperatingmasstransitrailwayservices
andpropertydevelopment,MTRCisalsoengagedinpropertyinvestmentand
management.Theseactivitiesarediscussedlaterinthereport.
5

streetcarnetworks(BernickandCervero,1997).By1912,privatelandholders
builtinterurbanraillinesasalossleaderinovertwodozenU.S.cities,opening
uplandforpropertydevelopmentthatyieldedtremendousprofits,easily
coveringinvestmentandoperatingcosts.Intodaysautomobileera,noother
globalcityhasresurrectedthepracticeofpublictransportvaluecapturetothe
degreethatHongKonghas.

Figure1.3.MissionofMTRCsPropertyDivision

BenefitsofIntegratedR+PDevelopment

MTRCsactiveinvolvementinpropertydevelopmentiswhatdistinguishesit
fromotherpublictransportorganizationsworldwide.6Propertydevelopment

InastudyconductedbytheLegislativeCouncilofHongKong(Liuetal.,1996)on
masstransitsystemsinsixglobalcities(Osaka,Seoul,Toronto,London,Singaporeand
HongKong),onlyHongKongandSingaporewerefoundtobeoperatingon
commercialprinciples.ConstructioncostsinSingapore,however,werebornebythe
governmentwhileinHongKongthemasstransitentityfullybearsthecosts.Inan
internationalsurveyconductedbyBarronetal.(2001),HongKongwasthelone
exceptioninrelyingongovernmentgrantsandtransferpaymentstocoverthemajority
ofcapitalcosts.HongKongsonlyformofsupportistheinjectionofequitycapital;the
returnsfromhigherequitysharescoverthesecosts.

playstwoimportantfinancialroles.Thechiefoneistofinanceinfrastructure.
Notably,R+Prelievesthepublicsectorofthefinancialburdenoffloatingbonds
andincurringdebttofinancerailwayexpansion.Additionally,itcreatesaready
mademarketoftransitusersintheformofresidentslivingnearstations,
employeesworkingaroundstations,andshopperspassingthroughstations
whogeneratefareboxrevenues.Thesearejustthedirectfinancialbenefits.
Indirectly,propertydevelopmentconferssuchsecondorderbenefitsas:

Improvedstationareaenvironmentsintheformofmasterplanningthat
improvescirculation,physicalintegrationofstationswithsurrounding
retailshoppingfacilities,andenrichmentoflanduses,allofwhichcan
furtherboostlandvaluesandincreaseridership;
Integrationofretailshoppingintostationenvironments,generating
ancillaryincomefromretailsalesaswellaspromptingsometransitriders
whopassbytopurchasegoods;and
Throughpubliccontroloflandnearstations,moderatinglandspeculation
andpreventingthelandvaluebenefitsaffordedbyrailimprovements
fromaccruingtoahandfulofprivateindividuals.

1.4

R+P:HowitWorks

MTRCdoesnotreceiveanycashsubsidiesfromtheHongKonggovernmentto
buildrailwayinfrastructure;insteaditreceivesaninkindcontributioninthe
formofalandgrantthatgivesthecompanyexclusivedevelopmentrightsfor
landaboveandadjacenttoitsstations.ThesegrantsrelieveMTRCfrom
purchasinglandontheopenmarket.Togenerateincome,MTRCcapitalizeson
therealestatedevelopmentpotentialofitsstations.Ho(2001)describes
propertydevelopmentasthejewelintheMTRCscrown.

Thespecificmechanismforcapturingrailsvalueaddedisasfollows.MTRC
purchasesdevelopmentrightsfromtheHongKonggovernmentatabefore
railpriceandsellstheserightstoaselecteddeveloper(amongalistofqualified
bidders)atanafterrailprice.7Thedifferencesareoftensubstantialandare

TheHongKongSpecialAdministrativeRegionownsalllandintheHongKong

territory.Privateindividualsandorganizationscanonlypurchase50yearleasesthat
grantsexclusivepropertydevelopmentrights.

10

abletocoverthecostofrailwayinvestments.8

TheHongKonggovernment,themajorityshareholderofMTRC,seedsthe
processbygrantingMTRCexclusivedevelopmentrightsbasedonthe
greenfieldsitevalue(i.e.,prerailprice).MTRCalsonegotiatesashareof
futurepropertydevelopmentprofitsand/oracoownershippositionfromthe
highestbidder.ThusMTRCreceivesafrontendpaymentforlandandaback
endshareofrevenuesandassetsinkind.9
Table1.1summarizesMTRCsportfolioofR+Pprojectsin2006andFigure1.4
mapstheirlocations.Bydesign,MTRChaspursuedadiverseportfolioof
projectstoshieldthecompanyfromswingsinHongKongsbusinesscycle.In
additiontoR+P,MTRChasdiversifieditsholdingsthroughequityownership,
cashholdings,propertymanagement,consulting,advertising,andownershipof
otherassets(e.g.,telecommunicationleases,convenienceretailshops).Thus,if
HongKongsrealestatemarketsoftens,MTRCisbufferedthroughotherasset
holdings;ifthelandmarketstrengthens,thecompanyparticipatesinthisupside
throughbothR+Pleasesandequityownership.
R+PsvitalincomeproducingroleisrevealedbyFigure1.5.Overthe20012005
period,propertydevelopmentproducedoverhalfofMTRCsrevenues.By
contrast,railwayincome,madeupmainlyoffareboxreceipts,generated28
percentoftotalincome.Together,MTRCsinvolvementinpropertyrelated
activitiesi.e.,development,investment,andmanagementproduced62
percentoftotalincome,morethantwiceasmuchasuserfares.

MTRCaimstosetreturnsforitsinvestmentsbasedontheWACCtheweighted
averagecostofcapitalpresentlysetat9.5%(reflectingtheexpectedreturninequity
andinterestfromborrowing)plusarentpremiumofbetween1.5%and3%forequity
shareholders,yieldinga11%to12.5%return.TheWACCfluctuatesbasedloanrates
chargedbycommercialbanks.Forriskierprojects,theWACCmightbesetat10%plus
a3%premium,yieldinga13%netreturn.MTRCwillinvestinrailwayprojectsifthese
netratesofreturn(11%to13%,dependingonrisks)areattained.This
WACC+premiumformulaisusedtoguidenotonlyrailwayinvestmentbutalso
MTRCsownrealestateinvestment,includingshoppingmallsattachedtostations.
9
Iftheprivateleaseholdersuffersfuturerevenuelosses,contractualarrangements
protectMTRCfromparticipatinginthelosses.

11

Table1.1.MTRCsPropertyDevelopmentOverview,2006

TypeofLanduse

Government

Hotel/
Service
&
Residential Commercial Office
Apartments Institutions
(#Units)

Urban
Lines
Airport
Line
Tweung
Kwan
OLine
Total

GFA(m2)

GFA(m2)

GFA(m2)

GFA(m2)

No.of
Carparks
($Spaces)

31,682

314,923

208,866

143,034

6,012

28,650

306,640

611,963

291,722

24,770

14,360

29,167
89,499

105,814
727,377

5,000
825,829

58,130
349,852

6,547
26,919

167,804

*Communityfacilitiesincludingschoolsaswellaselderandyouthcentreswillbe
providedhowevertheamountoffloorspaceissubjecttogovernmentagreements.

Figure1.4.LocationofHongKongsR+PProjects,2007

12

10%

10%

28%
52%
Railway
Property Development
Property Investment & Management
Non-fare
*2001-2005 Average

Figure1.5.MTRCRevenueSources,20012005Average.
Source:MTRCfinancialaccounts.

TimingandprojectphasingarecriticaltothesuccessofR+Pgiventhecyclical
natureofHongKongsrealestatemarket.Inrecentyears,MTRChasreliedon
propertydevelopmenttogenerateprofitstopayoffpastdebt.Thisisreflected
byFigure1.6,whichchartsannualprofits/lossesfrompropertydevelopmentand
otherrecurringbusinessesoverthe19802005period.Duringthe1980s,MTRC
mostlyincurrednetlosses(basedondifferencesbetweenrevenuesandcombined
operatinganddepreciatedcapitalcostaswellasdebtservice).Evenduringthis
periodofoperatinginthered,propertydevelopmentmoderatedlosses.
Beginninginthelate1990swhenMTRCbeganaggressivelypursuingR+Palong
theAirportRailwayLine,thenetyieldsprovidedcrucialincomethatwentto
financethemorerecentTseungKwanOextension.Ittookapproximately10
years(1997to2007)tofullypayoffcapitaldebtfortheAirportLineextension.
From2007onward,earningsfromR+PprojectsontheAirportLineproduce
fundsthatnolongerneedtogotowardpayingoffthisdebt,allowingthesefunds
tobeusedtocovercostsofTseungKwanOandotherplannedextensions.

13

HK$ billion
6

Profit/ (loss) from property development

Profit/(loss) from recurring businesses (excluding property development)
Profit/(loss) for the year (excluding investment property revaluation)

(1)

(2)

Opening
Opening
of Airport
of Tseung Kwan O
Opening
Railway Line
Line
of Urban Lines
80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05

Year

Figure1.6.TrendsinMTRCsProfitsandLossesfromPropertyDevelopment
andRecurringBusinessesforthe1980to2005Period

MTRChashardlybeenthesolefinancialbeneficiaryofR+P.Societyatlarge,
reflectedbyHongKongSARsmajorityownershipofMTRC,hasalsoreaped
substantialrewards.Forthe1980to2005period,itisestimatedthatHongKong
SARhasreceivednearly$140billion(intodaysHongKongdollars)innet
financialreturns.Thisisbasedonthedifferencebetweenearnedincome($171.8
billionfromlandpremiums,marketcapitalization,shareholdercashdividends,
andinitialpublicofferproceeds)andthevalueofinjectedequitycapital($32.2
billion).ThusthegovernmentofHongKonghasenjoyedtremendousfinance
returnsandseededtheconstructionofaworldclassrailwaynetworkwithout
havingtoadvanceanycashtoMTRC.The$140billionfigure,ofcourse,isonly
thedirectfinancialbenefit.Theindirectbenefitse.g.,higherridershipthrough
increaseddensities,reducedsprawl,airpollution,andenergyconsumption,etc.
haveincreasednetsocietalreturnswellbeyond$140billion.

14

1.5 TheR+PDevelopmentProcess

WhattriggersR+PprojectsarefutureplanstoextendMTRlinesorconstructnew
ones,consistentwithregionallanduseandurbandevelopmentgoalssetby
HongKonggovernment.MTRCstaffworkscloselywithgovernmentplanners
andtransportationprofessionalstodefineandassessthecomparativecostsof
differentalignmentandstationsitingoptions.Theyalsodiscussproperty
developmentopportunitiesthatenhancefinancialreturnsoftherailway
investmentandpromotelongrangeplanningobjectives.Withinthe
organization,MTRCmanagersweighfactorslikethevalueofland,density
potential,andprojectsizeandscaleindecidingwhethertoadvanceaspecific
R+Pproposal.10ThesettingofminimumdensityandsizethresholdsmeansR+P
projectshaveinthepastmostlyrespondedtoversusleadingthewayin
stimulatingnewdevelopment,althoughrecentdevelopmentslikeTungChung
stationontheAirportLineandHangHaunewtownattheterminusofthe
recentTseungKwanOlineareexamplesofR+Pprecedingurbandevelopment.11

Theassemblyoflandusestobebuiltatthestationislargelydeterminedby
marketdemand,constrainedbyzoningregulations.Commercialproperty
developmenthasoccurredmostlyatandnearcentralcityMTRstationswhile
residentialprojectshavebeenbuiltmainlyinoutlyingareasandatterminal
stations.OtherfactorsalsocomeintoplayindefiningR+Ppossibilitiesand
specificlanduseconfigurations,suchasthepresenceofalargedepot(providing
storageareasfortrains).MTRCsfirstR+Pproject,TelfordGardens,kickedoff
mainlybecausealargepodium,slabcoverdepotdeckwasbuiltattheKowloon
BayStation(Figure1.7andPhoto1.1).Theresultingexpansivesurfacearea
presentedopportunitiestobuildthispioneeringandsuccessfulmixed
residentialofficecommercialproject.

10

Plotratiosofatleast2.5aregenerallyviewedasnecessaryifR+Pistobefinancially
remunerative.Also,landvaluesneedtobeabovesomedefinedthresholdtogenerate
enoughaggregateincometojustifyR+Pinitiatives.Andthereneedstobeacriticalmass
oflandtomakepursuingR+Pfinanciallyworthwhile.
11Brownlee(2001)notesthattherelianceonvaluecaptureforfundinginvestmentmeans
theremustgenerallybeapopulationbaseinplacebeforearailwayisbuilt.Hewrites:
Thusittookyearsbeforearaillinecouldbebuilttonewtowns,suchasTseungKwan
O.Therailoperatorhadtoeffectivelywaitforpopulationtogetuptoabove250,000.
Thiswayoffinancingrailhascauseddelayinbuildingrailtopopulationcenters.
(Brownlee,2001,p.4).

15

OncethedecisionismadetomoveforwardwithaspecificR+Pproposalandall
partiesareinagreement,thegovernmentofHongKonggrantsMTRCexclusive
developmentrightsforspecificsites,definingtowerlocations,permissibleuses,
andplotratiodensities(i.e.,floorspacedividedbylandarea).MTRCstaffthen
preparesamasterlayoutoftheproject,includingthesitingandmassingof
buildings,blockdesigns,standardsforbuildingquality,andlocationsofvehicle
accesspoints.Theyalsoobtainnecessarystatutoryplanningapprovalsforthe
proposeddevelopment.

Next,MTRCissuestendersbidsamongpotentialdevelopersandselectsa
partnerbasedontheattractivenessofcompetingfinancialoffers,experience,
managementcapabilities,andotherfactors.Developersaregivensome
flexibilitytorecommendandnegotiatesitemodificationstoR+Pproposals.
Onceapublicprivatepartnershipisagreedto,thedevelopertypicallypaysa
withraillandpremiumforexclusivedevelopmentrightsandalldevelopment
costs.Inmostinstances,MTRChasaprofitsharingagreement,receivingaset
percentageoffutureprofitsaswellequityownershipasinthecaseofthe
InternationalFinancialCentretowerabovetheHongKongstation,thecitys
tallestbuilding,whereinMTRCnegotiatedownershipof18floorsasanassetin
kind(Photo1.2).

Figure1.7andPhoto1.1.TelfordGardenandPlazaMixedUseResidential
ShoppingOfficeR+PProjectattheKowloonBayStation

16

Photo1.2.InternationalFinancialCentreToweratHongKongStation,Hong
KongsTallestBuilding.MTRCowns18floors
oftheofficetowerasaninkindasset.

Onceaprojectbreaksground,MTRCdoesnotdisappearfromthescene.Tothe
contrary,thecompanyoverseesprojectdesign,engineering,andconstruction,
andmanytimesstaysinvolvedasthepropertymanager.Thiscontinuous,
seamlessinvolvementfromprojectconceptualizationtoimplementationto
propertymanagementensuresthatoriginalvisionsareadheredto,thereis
continuitytoprojectdevelopment,andareliable,transparent,andwellmanaged
developmentprocessunfolds.Also,projecttenantshaveconfidencethatR+P
projectsarehighqualityplacestoresideandrunabusinessbecausethemaster
planner,MTRC,remainsactivelyinvolvedthroughoutthedevelopmentprocess.
Indeed,MTRCsonsitepresencemeansaresponsiblecompanyofficialis
readilyavailabletofieldandrespondtoconcernsandweightheviewsofall
stakeholdersindaytodaydecisions.Therapidabsorptionofnewunitsand
retailspaceatrecentlybuiltmixeduseR+PprojectslikeattheKowloon,Tung
Chung,andTsingYistationsisatestamenttoMTRCscommitmentnotonlyto
projectconstructionbutalsomanagementandoversight.Andthefactthat
HongKongsgovernmentcontinuestograntMTRCexclusiveproperty
developmentrightssuggeststhatthepopulaceatlargeishappywiththeresults.

R+PasanApproach,NotaProduct

R+P,itisworthnoting,isasmuchanapproachasaproduct.Yes,shinynew
buildingsatopsubwaystationsarethetangibleoutcomesofR+P.However,R+P

17

alsoplaysavitalroleinmanagingandfinancingrailwayexpansion,advancing
highqualityurbandesigns,creatingonestopsettingsforliveworkshop
play,guidingregionalurbangrowth,andmore.Aswithallgoodpublic
privatepartnership,thisoccursinawinwinfashioni.e.,therailway
corporationreapsfinancialbenefitsandsocietyatlargebenefitsfrommore
sustainable,transitorientedpatternsofdevelopment.

IntheirindepthstudyofR+Psinstitutionalstructure,Tangetal.(2004)identify
fourkeyelementsbehindtheR+Papproach:

(1) Policy.Favorablegovernmentsupportoftransitandlanduseintegration,
expressedbylandgrantsandfinancialassistancetoMTRC;
(2) Process.Forwardlookingplanning,management,andcontrolprocedures
thatensureanefficientapproachfromprojectinceptiontocompletion;
(3) Project.Highqualityrealestateprojectsthatappealtotenants,shoppers,
andtransitusers;and
(4) Organization.Anentrepreneurialentitythatbalancesthefinancial
interestsofinvestorswithlargersocietalgoals.

MTRCasMasterPlanner

Tangetal.(2004)alsoarguethatasingleentitylikeMTRCisbestsuitedto
managethecomplexityoflanddevelopmentandtoleveragetheopportunitiesto
recapturevaluecreatedbyrailinvestments.Theyattributethisto:asset
specificity(allowingaprofessionalfocusontheintricaciesoflanddevelopment),
accumulatedknowledge(amongMTRCmanagers),reduceduncertainty(owing
toadisciplinedapproachtopropertydevelopmentandaccountabilitytoequity
shareholders),internalizationoftransitsvalueadded(bymaximizingancillary
developmentpotential),andassetprotection(throughinvolvementin
constructionandpropertymanagement).

Asthemasterplanner,masterdesigner,andmasterarchitect,MTRCalignsthe
interestsofdifferentstakeholders.Importantly,itsetsandenforcesall
developmentstandards.Forprivatedevelopers,therulesofthegameareclear
attheoutset.Thisreducesuncertaintiesandrisks.Oneentityoversightalso
allowsstrongtransit/landuselinkages.Inaddition,MTRCactsasan
intermediarybetweengovernmentandprivatedevelopersspecifyingsite
requirements,negotiatingagreements,andbalancingbetweencompetingpublic
andprivateinterests.

18

Today,MTRChasareputationforundertakingdevelopmentofhighend
residentialandupmarketcommercialprojects.Thisisnotonlyduetothe
accessibilityadvantagesofpropertiesnearrailwaystations.Itisalsoaproduct
ofhighqualitystationareadesigns,MTRCsproficiencyatmanagingand
maintainingrealestateprojects,andthecompanyscommitmenttoseamlessly
integratingrailwaystationswithsurroundingactivities.

References

ARUP.2003.TravelCharacteristicsSurvey2002:FinalReport.HongKongSpecial
AdministrativeRegion,TransportDepartment.

Barron,B.,Ng.,K.,Ho,B.,andChan,C.2001.FinancingMassTransitRailways:An
InternationalSurvey.HongKong:UniversityofHongKong,CentreofUrban
PlanningandEnvironmentalManagement.

Bernick,M.andCervero,R.1998.TransitVillagesinthe21stCentury.NewYork:
McGrawHill.

Brownlee,J.2001.SustainableTransportinHongKong:TheDynamicsofthe
TransportRelatedDecisionMakingProcess.See:http://www.civic
exchange.org/publications/Intern/Sustainable%20Transport.pdf

Ho,M.PrivatizationoftheMTRCorporation.HongKongUniversityCentrefor
AsianBusinessCases,HKU139,08/15/01.

Lam,W.H.K.2003.AdvancedModelingforTransitOperationsandServicePlanning.
Oxford,England:Elsevier.

Liu,E.,Wu,J.,andLee,J.1996.CreditRatingsofMassTransitSystems.Hong
Kong:ResearchandLibraryServicesDivision,LegislativeCouncilSecretariat.

Tang,B.S.,Chiang,Y.H.,Baldwin,A.N.,andYeung,C.W.2004.Studyofthe
IntegratedRailPropertyDevelopmentModelinHongKong,TheHongKong
PolytechnicUniversity.

Tiry,C.2003.HongKongsFutureisGuidedbyTransitInfrastructure.Japan
RailwayandTransportReview,Vol.33,pp.2835.

19

20

ChapterTwo

R+Pas
TransitOrientedDevelopment

2.1TransitOrientedDevelopmentandSustainableUrbanism
WhileR+Pprojectsareoftenviewedasaneffectivetoolforfinancingrailway
investments,itisimportanttorecognizethatitisalsoabonafideformof
TransitOrientedDevelopment(TOD).TODistodaywidelyconsideredtobe
oneofmostsustainableformsofurbandevelopment,beingpracticedinmany
partsoftheworldasameansofreducingthedominanceofprivate
automobiletravelandpromotingsettlementpatternsthatareconduciveto
transitriding(Calthrope,1993;Cerveroetal,2004,Dunphyetal.,2004).As
compact,mixeduse,pedestrianfriendlydevelopmentcenteredaround
transitstations,TODencourages,bydesign,residents,workers,and
shopperstodrivetheircarslessandridemasstransitmore(Bernickand
Cervero,1997,p.5).Researchshowsthatthesefeaturesofthebuilt
environmentdensity,diversityoflanduses,andwalkingorienteddesigns
substantiallyinfluencetravelbehaviorandoftenprompttravelerstooptfor
alternativestotheprivatecar,includingpublictransitusage(Kenworthyand
Lave,1999;EwingandCervero,2001).Fromausersperspective,TODallows
foramoreseamlessformofmasstransporttravelbybringingthecommunity
closertothetransitnodeitself.

TODhasmultipleaimshoweverincreasingchoicesopeningupmore
optionsinhowtotravel,wheretoliveandwork,placestogo,opportunities
tointeractwithothersisoneofitssignaturefeature.Soisavarietyofland
usesandbuildingtypes.Andsoispedestrianfriendliness.However,the
challengesofcreatingTODaremorethanphysicalinnature(Cervero,etal.,
2002).Attentionmustalsobegiventosuchmattersasastationareas
security,economicandcommunitydevelopmentpotential,culturalhistory,
andprospectsforbuildingsocialandhumancapital.

TODisoneformofcontemporarymovementsinurbandesignlike
traditionalneighborhooddesign(TND)orNewUrbanismthataimto
stimulatestreetlifeanddiversifyurbanlandscapes.Itisdistinguishedfrom
otherformsofsmartgrowth,ofcourse,bythepresenceofarailwaystation.A
coreideaofthesepopulardesignmovementsisthatcommunitiesshouldbe
likethoseofyesteryear,inthepreautomobileera,whenrelianceonfoot
travelcreatedmorecompact,smalllot,mixedusedevelopmentpatterns.
Amongthetrademarksoftraditionalneighborhoodsareacommercialcore
withinwalkingdistanceofmostresidents,awellconnectedgridstreet
21

network,mixedlanduses,trafficcalmedlocalstreets,andvaryingstylesand
densitiesofhousing.

2.2

TODinaRegionalContext

SuccessfulTODsarenotjustisolatednodes.Oneofthemajorshortcomings
ofmanyTODsintheworldsmostautomobiledependentsociety,theUnited
States,isthattheyaresimplyislandsinaseaofautoorienteddevelopment
(Cerveroetal.,2004).AstandaloneTODandtheabsenceofothermixeduse
nodestowhichtotravelwilldolittletoprompttravelerstogiveuptheircars
andpatronizepublictransport.OneofthekeylessonsfromScandinavian
citieslikeCopenhagen,DenmarkandStockholm,Swedenistheimportanceof
buildinganetworkofcentersandsubcentersinterconnectedbyhighquality
transit(Cervero,1998).Overfiftyyearsago,urbanplannersinbothcities
articulatedcogentvisionsoffutureurbanform,notablynecklaceofpearls
settlementpatterns(Figure2.1).Inbothcities,corridorsforchanneling
overspillgrowthfromtheurbancentersweredefinedearlyintheplanning
process,andrailinfrastructurewasbuilt,ofteninadvanceofdemand,tosteer
growthalongdesiredgrowthaxes.InthecaseofStockholm,plannersstrived
tocreatejobshousingbalancealongrailservedaxialcorridors.Thisinturn
hasproduceddirectionalflowbalances.Duringpeakhours,55percentof
Stockholmsrailcommutersaretypicallytravelinginonedirectionontrains
and45percentareheadingintheotherdirection.Asimpressive,Stockholm
isoneofthefewplaceswhereautomobilityappearstobereceding.Between
1980and1990,itwastheonlycityinasampleof37globalcitiesthat
registeredapercapitadeclineincaruseadropoffof229annualkilometers
oftravelperperson(KenworthyandLaube,1999).

CopenhagenregionalvisionofTODtooktheformofthecelebratedFinger
Planfivewelldefinedlinearcorridors,eachorientedtoahistoricalDanish
markettown.Asimportantly,greenbeltwedgessetasideasagricultural
preserves,openspace,andnaturalhabitatswerealsodesignatedand
accordinglymajorinfrastructurewasdirectedawayfromthesedistricts.The
evolutionofCopenhagenfromaFingerPlan,toadirectedrailinvestment
programalongdefinedgrowthaxes,tofingerlikeurbanizationpatternsis
revealedbyFigure2.2.

22

Figure2.1.TODsasNecklacesofPearls

Figure2.2.Copenhagen:FromFingerPlan,toFiveAxisRadialInvestment,
toCorridorsofSatellite,RailServedNewTowns

2.3The5DsofTOD

Intermsoftheirphysicalmakeup,TODsfeaturewhathasbeenreferredtoas
thethreedimensions,or3Ds,ofsustainabledevelopment:density,
diversity,anddesign(CerveroandKockelman,1997).Densitymeanshaving
enoughresidents,workers,andshopperswithinareasonablewalking
distanceoftransitstationstogeneratehighridership.Diversitycallsfora
mixtureoflanduses,housingtypes,buildingvernaculars,andwaysof
circulatingwithinneighborhoods.Anddesignembodiesphysicalfeatures,
sitelayouts,aesthetics,andamenitiesthatencouragewalking,biking,and
transitridingaswellassocialengagement.

23

The3Ds,ofcourse,arehardlyindependentofeachotherindeed,most
mixeduseneighborhoodshaveplentifulpedestrianamenitiesandarefairly
compact.The3Ds,then,mightbeviewedasoverlappingspheres,orVenn
Diagrams,ofhighqualityandsustainableurbanenvironments(Figure2.3).

Twoadditionaldimensionsdistancetotransitanddestination
accessibilitycanbeaddedtothelist,formingthe5Dsofthebuilt
environment(Figure2.3).Studiesshowridershipamongresidentsand
workersoftentapersexponentiallywithdistancefromarailwaystation
(Holtzclawetal.,2002;Cerveroetal.,2002).Inthecaseofresidences,thisis
oftenaproductofselfselectionforlifestylereasons,somechosetorentor
purchasearesidencewithineasyaccesstotransitfortheveryreasonthey
prefertotakethetraintoworkorotherdestinationsthandrive(Cervero,
2007).DestinationaccessibilitypertainstohowwellaTODisconnectedto
retailshops,activitycenters,andotherpopulardestinations.Itthuscaptures
thedegreetowhichpublictransportefficientlyconnectsastationarea
neighborhoodtoactivitiesspreadthroughoutaregion.

MostneighborhoodsaroundMTRsrailwaystationsclearlyfeaturemany,if
notall,the5DcharacteristicsofTOD.Withamonghighestdensitiesinthe
world,retailshoppingintermixedwithofficesandresidentialtowers,and
numerouspedestrianpathwaysandskybridgesthatinterlacebuildings,all
MTRstationsandtheirsurroundingsembodythe3Dsdensity,diversity,
anddesigntosomedegree.Andwithbuildingheightsthattaperwith
distancefromstations(weddingcakestyle)andconnectedtootherpartsof
theterritorybytwoextensiveurbanrailwaynetwork,mostMTRstationsand
R+Pprojectsaswellengenderfeaturesofall5Ds.Agoodexampleis
MaritimeSquare,plannedandmanagedbyMTRCaspartofthedevelopment
ofTsingYistationairportline.ThemixeduseMaritimeSquareR+Pproject
boastsaseamlessintegrationbetweentherailwaystationandshoppingcenter
aswellastheabovestationresidentialtowers(Figure2.4).Residentscan
experienceatemperaturecontrolledenvironmentabletogofromtheir
luxuryapartmentstoshoppingbelowandthendirectlyintotheMTRstation
withoutsteppingoutdoors.MaritimeSquarecametofruitionbecausethe
opportunitiesforphysicalintegrationwereassessedatthemasterplanning
stage(Tangetal.,2004).

However,mostMTRstationsandassociatedR+PprojectsarenotlikeTsingYi
StationandMaritimeSquare.Theyvaryowingtodifferencesintopography
andgeographicalsettings,historiesandtimingofdevelopment,socio
demographiccharacteristics,realestatemarketvitality,andneighborhood
attitudesandsentiments.Accordingly,theyvaryenoughacrossthese5D
dimensionstocreatedifferentphysicalenvironmentsandpotentiallydifferent
24

realestatemarketcharacteristicsandridershipperformance.Forthisvery
reason,atypologyofMTRsstationswithR+Pprojectsisdevelopedinthe
nextchapter,builtalongthelinesofthe5Ds.

Possessingthe5Dsdoesnotnecessarilymeandevelopmentisorientedto
transit.IntheUnitedStates,thetagofTODhascomeunderattackbythose
whocontendthatbuildingserectednearU.S.transitnodesdonotalways
haveanykindoffunctionalrelationshiptoastation.Bigcommercialboxes
envelopedbyabundant,freeparkingdonotconstituteTODregardlesshow
closetheymightbetoastation.SuchTransitAdjacentDevelopment(TAD)
characterizesalotofcommercialactivitiesnearsuburbanrailstationsinthe
UnitedStates(Photo2.1).Urbandesigns,andparticularlyattentiontothe
needsofthepedestrians(sincealltransitusersarepedestrianstosome
degree),areoftenwhatdetermineswhetherdevelopmentisorientedversus
adjacenttotransit.WhileTADislessprevalentinHongKongduetothe
scarcityoflandandthustheneedtocarefullyintegrateddevelopment,there
arenonethelessmissedopportunitiestointegratesurroundingdevelopment
withMTRandformerKCRstations,particularlyinthecaseofsomeolder
stationsandcommercialprojects.Thesearediscussedlaterinthereportin
thecasestudyanalysesinChapterFour.

3 Ds of the Built Environment

5 Ds of the
Built Environment

Density

Density
Diversity

Design
Diversity

Distance
(to transit)

Design

Destination
Accessibility

Figure2.3.Three&FiveDsofBuiltEnvironments:Density,Diversity,
Design,DestinationAccessibility,andDistancetoTransit

25

Podium Garden

HighHigh-rise
residential buildings

5/F (Park-and-ride
Facilities and
Residential Parking)

4/F (Residential
Parking)

3/F (Platforms of Airport

Express and Tung
Chung Line, Shopping
Mall)

Station

2/F (Platforms of

Shopping Mall

PTI
Station
Facilities
Shopping
Mall
Residential
Facilities
Recreational
Facilities

Airport Express and

Tung Chung Line,
Shopping Mall)

1/F (Station
Concourse, Shopping
Mall and PTI)

G/F (Loading/
Unloading, Shopping
Mall, PTI and Parking)

Figure2.4.MaritimeSquareResidentialRetailDevelopmentAtopTsingYi
Station.MaritimeSquarefeatureshierarchicallyintegrateduses.Shoppingmall
extendsfromthegroundfloortothe3rdlevel.Stationconcoursesitsonthe1stfloor,
withraillinesandplatformsaboveandancillary/logisticalfunctions(likepublic
transport/businterchangeandparking)atorbelow.Abovethe4thand5thfloor
residentialparkingliesapodiumgardenandabovethis,highrise,luxuryresidential
towers.

2.4 TODasPlacemaking

TODismorethanbricksandmortarorsomefancifularchitecturalvision.At
itscore,TODisaboutplacemaking.InthebookTransitVillagesforthe21st
Century,BernickandCervero(1997,p.5)castTODinsuchplacemaking
terms:

Thecenterpieceofthetransitvillageisthetransitstationitselfandthe
civicandpublicspacesthatsurroundit.Thetransitstationiswhat
connectsvillageresidentsandworkerstotherestoftheregion,
providingconvenientandreadyaccesstodowntowns,majoractivity
centerslikesportsstadium,andotherpopulardestinations.The
surroundingpublicspacesoropengroundsservetheimportant

26

functionofbeingacommunitygatheringspot,asiteforspecialevents,
andaplaceforcelebrationsamoderndayversionoftheGreekagora.

Photo2.1.TAD:TransitAdjacentDevelopmentinSanJose,
CaliforniasSiliconValley.Lightrailstationinroadwaymedian,separated
fromsurroundingbuildings,allofwhicharespreadout,singleuseemployment
centersenvelopedbysurfaceparking.

Amongtheadjectivesoftenusedbycontemporaryurbandesignersto
describehighquality,transitfriendlyplacesare:

Comfortable:ahumanscalesettingwherebypeoplearenot
overwhelmedbytheheightofbuildings,robbedofdaylightbythecast
ofshadows,orexcessivelysubjectedtosuchelementsaswindeddies.
Comfortisparticularlyimportantforrailstationareaswherereal
estatemarketsexertpressuretomaximizeprofitsbyincreasing
densitiesatandnearstationentrances.
Memorable:interestingmilieusthatinstinctivelydrawpeopletothem,
oftenbyhighlightinganareasdistinctivehistory,culture,architecture,
ornaturalfeatures.
Aestheticandamenities:astrongaccentonlivabilitythroughhigh
qualityandcoordinatedurbandesigns,amplelandscapingand
greenery,displayofthearts,andpreservationofnaturalfeatures;
aestheticsbecomeallthemoreimportantinTODssoastosoften
peoplesperceptionsofsurroundingdensities.
Connectivity:theabilitytofreelyandseamlesslyinterconnecttonearby
placesinanefficient,pleasant,andsafemanner.
Legibility:visualcues,buildingorientations,signage,andclearsitelines
thatallowpeopletoeasilyreadtheirenvironsandthusreachdesired
destinationsinatimely,predictablemanner.

27

Naturalsurveillance:lively,vibrantsettingsofsocialinteractionthat
putseyesonthestreetsoastoprovideacollectivesenseofsecurity
andselfpolicing.

TheideathatTODismorethananassemblyofbuildingsaroundtransit
nodesalsospeakstoitssocialandculturalcontext.Someobserversmakethe
casethatTODprovidesanopportunitytobuildsocialcapitali.e.,
encouragingsocialinteractionandstrengtheningthebondbetweenpeople
andthecommunitiesinwhichtheylive,work,andplay(DittmarandOhland,
2004).BuildingupontheseminalwritingsofPutman(2000),thehopeand
expectationisthatbyallowingmorefacetofaceinteractionandpublic
engagement,TODcanplayaroleinpromotinggoodcitizenship,providing
eyesonthestreetasameanstoreducecrime,promotingvolunteerismlike
participationinneighborhoodcleanupdrives,andgreatersensitivitytothe
difficultiesfacedbysomesegmentsofsociety,liketheelderlyandpoor.
TODscanalsocreatelivelyurbandistricts,thekindsofplacespeopleare
naturallydrawnto.Inthisvein,BertoliniandSpit(1998)noteTODsexploit
thesynergiesbetweenrailwayandcommunities,turningthetransitstation
intoaplacetoberatherthanaplacetopassthrough.

WecanagainturntoScandinavianexperiencestogaininsightsintodesign
elementsthatenhanceTODsroleasplacemaking.IngreaterStockholm,
manyrailstationsarephysicallyandsymbolicallythehubofthecommunity.
Inmostmasterplannednewtowns,likeVllingbyandSkarholmen,therail
stopsitssquarelyinthetowncenter(Cervero,1998).Uponexitingthestation,
onestepsintoacarfreepublicsquaresurroundedbyshops,restaurants,
schools,andcommunityfacilities.Thecivicsquare,oftenadornedwith
benches,waterfountains,andgreenery,isthecommunityscentralgathering
spotaplacetorelax,socialize,andasettingforspecialevents,whether
nationalholidays,publiccelebrations,parades,orsocialdemonstrations
(Photo2.2).Sometimes,thesquaredoesdoubledutyasaplaceforfarmersto
selltheirproduceorstreetartiststoperform,changingchameleonlikefrom
anopenairmarketonedaytoaconcertvenuethenext.Theassortmentof
flowerstalls,sidewalkcafes,

28

Photo2.2.TODPublicSquare,Vllingby,StockholmCounty,Sweden.A
pedestrianfriendly,carfreecivicsquarefunctionsasVllingbystowncenter.The
accentonlivabilityisshowcasedbystreetfurnitureandbenches,flowerplantings,
waterfountains,publicart,cobblestonewalkways,andanassortmentofground
levelretailshops.StockholmsTunnelbanasubwayentranceistotheleft(identified
bytheroundTsign).

newsstands,andoutdoorvendorsdottingthesquare,combinedwiththe
musingsandconversationsofresidentssittinginthesquare,retireesplaying
chess,andeverydayencountersamongfriends,addscolorandbreatheslife
intothecommunity.

ThischaracterizationofTODasasociallyengagingvillagewrapped
aroundarailwaystationismostpertinenttoneighborhoodswhereresidences
arethedominantlanduses.Althoughbuiltatmuchhigherdensitiesthan
mightbeconsideredavillage,andcertainlywellabovethoseinrailserved
Scandinaviansuburbs,MTRstationslikeKowloonBayandTungChung
nonethelessimpartasenseofplace.Theydothisinpartbycreatinga
significantpublicspaceoutsidethestationthatfunctionsasacasual
communitygatheringplace.TungChungstationanditsadjacentcivic
square,forinstance,istodaythecenterpieceoftheTungChungnewtown
andaccordingtoTangetal.(2004,p.27)ithasthepotentialtobecomeHong
Kongslandmarkgatewayfromvisitorsarrivingattheairport(Photo2.3).

29


Photo2.3.TungChungStationEnvironment.Openspaceandattractive
landscapingseparatestheMTRstationfromnearbyresidentialtowers.

AsdiscussedinthecasestudiesinChapterFour,manyofMTRsnewer
stationareas,likeTungChung,areofahumanscale,featuringbrightnight
lights,openness(muchappreciatedinahyperdensecity),vividand
coordinatedurbandesigns,andthroughactivepedestrianmovements,the
kindofnaturalsurveillancethatgivespeopleasenseofcomfort.

2.5UrbanTODsandJointDevelopment

TODsneednotbepredominantlyresidentialintheirmakeup.UrbanTODs
typicallyhavemoreofanofficeandcommercialorientation.Concentrating
retailcentersandjobsitesinandaroundstationsiseverybitasimportantto
promotingtransitridershipasconcentratingresidentialtowers.Withoutthe
destinationendofatripalsoconvenientlyservedbytransit,residential
TODswillnotyieldhighridershipdividends.Alloftheworldsmost
successfultransitmetropolisesStockholm,Copenhagen,Tokyo,Singapore
complementresidentialTODswithurbancentersinterlinkedbyhighquality,
highcapacityrailtransit(Cervero,1998).AmongMTRstationsthatplaythis
importantcomplementaryroleasprimarydestinationsareCentral,Hong
Kong,Admiralty,QuarryBay,andSheungWan.HongKongstation,for
example,notonlyfunctionsasamajorofficeretailhotelcomplexintheurban
core,butalsoanintermodalconnectionpoint,offeringtransportinterchange
(includingcheckinforandexpressconnectionstotheInternationalAirport)
(Figure2.5).

30

Figure2.5.MixedUse,IntermodalActivitiesatMTRCsHongKong
Station

UrbanTODshavethepotentialtospinoffsecondaryeconomicbenefitssuch
asprovidingopportunitiesforjointdevelopment(e.g.,buildingaretailstore
adjacenttoatransitstationandgeneratingleaserevenuesforatransitagency)
(BernickandCervero,1997).Inmanyways,TODisasecondaryspinoffof
theR+Pmodelsfinancialfocusthatis,highqualityandsustainable
urbanismisanimportantbyproduct.

Technically,jointdevelopmentcanbebutisnotalwaysTODandmostTOD
isnotjointdevelopment.Transitjointdevelopmentisdistinguishedfrom
TODmainlybybeingtiedtoaspecificrealestateproject,venture,or
brokereddealbetweenapublicentity(likeatransitagency)andoneormore
privateinterests.Jointdevelopmentnormallyoccursonatransitagencys
propertyorinitsairrights(Cerveroetal.,2004).Globally,theinventoryof
jointdevelopmentattransitstationsincludeairrightsdevelopment,ground
leasearrangements,stationinterfaceorconnectionfeeprograms,andother
initiativesthatpromoterealestatedevelopmentatorneartransitstationsto
themutualbenefitsofpublicandprivateinterests.

Atitscore,jointdevelopmentoperatesontheprincipleofquidproquo
developersobtaintherighttodevelopstationlandbymakingadirect
payment(purchase,andlease,capitalcontribution,developmentfee).By
enablingpublicprivatepartnership,jointdevelopmentnotonlyallowscapital

31

coststobecoveredbutalsoprovidesanopportunityforimplementinga
comprehensivelymasterplanneddevelopmentprojectwithahighquality
urbandesignthatenticesadditionalprivateinvestment.

AsawinwinarrangementMTRCsR+Pprojectsareakintotransitjoint
development,althoughinsteadofleasinglandtoprivatedevelopers,asinthe
casewithjointdevelopmentintheU.S.andmanyotherpartsoftheworld,
MTRCoftensellsdevelopmentrightsoutrighttoqualifiedandsuccessful
privatebidders.Regardless,theoutcomeisthesame:integratedrailand
propertydevelopmentthatisfinanciallyremunerative.Ofnote,both
approachesoperateonthecoreprincipleofvaluecapturereapingthe
financialbenefitscreatedbytheaccessibilitygainsmadepossiblethrough
publicsectorinvestmentsinrailtransit.

References

Bernick,M.andR.Cervero.1997.TransitVillagesforthe21stCentury.New
York:McGrawHill.

Bertolini,L.andSpit,T.1998.CitiesonRail.London:SponPress.

Calthorpe,P.1993.TheNextAmericanMetropolis:Ecology,Communityandthe
AmericanDream.NewYork:PrincetonArchitecturalPress.

Cervero,R.1998.TheTransitMetropolis:AGlobalInquiry.Washington,D.C.:
IslandPress.

Cervero,R.2007. TransitOrientedDevelopmentsRidershipBonus:AProduct
ofSelfSelectionandPublicPolicies,EnvironmentandPlanningA,Vol.39,pp.
20682085.

Cervero,R.andKockelman,TravelDemandandthe3Ds:Density,Diversity,
andDesign,TransportationResearchD,Vol.2,No.3:199219,1997.

Cervero,R.,C.Ferrell,C.,andS.Murphy.2002.TransitOriented
DevelopmentandJointDevelopmentintheUnitedStates:ALiterature
Review.ResearchResultsDigest.Washington,D.C.:TransportationResearch
Board,TransitCooperativeResearchProgram,No.52.

Cervero,R.,S.Murphy,C.Ferrell,N.Goguts,Y.Tsai.2004.TransitOriented

32

DevelopmentinAmerica:Experiences,Challenges,andProspects.Washington,
D.C.:TransportationResearchBoard,TCRPReport102.

Dittmar,H.andOhland,G.2004.TheNewTransitTowns:BestPracticesin
TransitOrientedDevelopment.Washington,D.C.:IslandPress.

Dunphy,R.,Cervero,R.,Dock,R.,McAvey,M.,Porter,D.andSwenson,C.
2004.DevelopingAroundTransit:StrategiesandSolutionsThatWork.
Washington,D.C.:UrbanLandInstitute.

Ewing,R.andCervero,R.2001.TravelandtheBuiltEnvironment:A
Synthesis.TransportationResearchRecord1780,pp.87113.

Holtzclaw,J.,R.Clear,H.Dittmar,D.Goldstein,andP.Haas.2002.Location
Efficiency:NeighborhoodSocioEconomicCharacteristicsDetermineAuto
OwnershipandUse:StudiesinChicago,LosAngelesandSanFrancisco,
TransportationPlanningandTechnology,Vol.25,pp.127.

Kenworthy,J.andLaude,F.1999.AnInternationalSourcebookofAutomobile
DependenceinCities,19601990.Boulder:UniversityofColoradoPress.

Putnam,S.2000.BowlingAlone:TheCollapseandRevivalofAmerican
Community.NewYork:Simon&Schuster.

Tang,B.S.,Chiang,Y.H.,Baldwin,A.N.,andYeung,C.W.2004.Studyofthe
IntegratedRailPropertyDevelopmentModelinHongKong.HongKong:The
HongKongPolytechnicUniversity.

33

34


PartII
AnalysisofR+P:
Typologies,CaseStudies,
PerformanceImpacts,andRegionalContext

WhattypesofR+Pprojectshaveevolvedovertime,howwellaretheyintegrated
intosurroundingcommunities,andtowhatdegreedotheyinfluenceMTR
ridershipandrealestatemarketperformance?Theseareamongthequestions
addressedinthesecondpartofthereport.ChapterThreecreatestwotypologies
ofR+Pprojects:onebasedonbuiltenvironmentcharacteristicsofR+Pprojects,
suchasdensity,scale,andlanduses;theotherbasedonhousingcharacteristics
anddevelopmentpatterns.AssociationsbetweentypesofR+Pprojectsand
ridershippatternsareexamined.ChapterFourpresentsqualitativecasestudies
ofprojectsforeachR+Ptype.Throughfieldsurveys,urbandesignandthe
qualityofwalkingenvironmentsareassessed.Partnershiparrangementsfor
constructing,managing,andsharingofcostsandprofitsarealsodiscussedfor
eachcase.ChapterFivealsopresentscasestudiesofR+P,howeverthefocusis
hownewergenerationprojectsbasedontransitorienteddesignprinciples
comparetoearlieroneswhichweremotivatedalmostexclusivelybyfinancial
concerns.RidershippatternsarecontrastedbetweennewerandolderR+P
projects.ThesixthchapterfocusesexplicitlyontheinfluencesofR+PonMTR
patronageaswellashousingprices.Statisticalmodelsareestimatedthatgauge
theinfluencesofR+Paswellastransitorienteddevelopmentontheseoutcomes.
ChapterSevenclosesoutPartIIwithamoremacroscaleperspective,examining
theroleofR+Pinachievingregionaldevelopmentobjectives,suchasnewtown
development,landconservation,andurbanregeneration.AsHongKong
continuestoexperienceeconomicrestructuringtowardamoreservicebased
economy,theR+Papproachiswellpositionedtoguidetheurbantransformation
process.

35

36

ChapterThree

R+PandStationAreaTypologies:
BuiltEnvironmentsandHousingDevelopment

3.1TypologiesofR+PProjects

WhilemostR+PprojectstoweraboveorbesidesMTRstations,theyarehardly
oneinthesame.Indeedtheyvarybylanduses,buildingdensities,sitedesigns,
connectivitytosurroundingneighborhoods,intermodalprovisions,andthe
degreeofintegrationwithstationconcourses.LikemostTODs,R+Pprojectsare
notmonoliths;theyvaryplacetoplace.

ThischapteraimstoshedlightonthedifferenttypesofR+Pprojects,primarily
withregardstobuiltenvironments,usingthe5DsintroducedinChapterTwo.A
typologyisalsoconstructedonhousingprojectswithin500metersofMTR
stationswithregardtofactorsliketype(e.g.,privatelyownedorpublicly
subsidized),density,andproximitytostations.Theprimaryreasonfor
constructingthesetypologiesisdescriptivei.e.,toclassifyprojectsbasedon
theirsharedcharacteristics.Asecondaryobjectiveisnormative:togaininsights
intohowridershipvariesamongtypesofR+Pprojectsandhousing
developments.Additionally,someoftheanalysesinlaterchapters,inparticular
casestudydiscussionsofR+Pdesigns(ChapterFour),drawuponthese
classificationse.g.,casestudyexamplesarepresentedforeachR+Ptype.

Classificationisoneoftheoldestpursuitsofhumankind.Whetherusedfor
studyingbuildings,neighborhoods,cars,oranimalspecies,classificationisa
usefultoolfordistillinglargevolumesofinformationintomoreinterpretable
subgroups.Borrowinganidiom,ithelpsoneseetheforestthroughthetrees.

3.2

R+PTypology:BuiltEnvironments

WhattypesoflanduseenvironmentsanddensityprofilescharacterizeR+P
projects?Toaddressthisquestion,datawerecompiledforeachof25MTR
stationswithR+Pprojectsasoflate2006.ForeachR+Psite,inhousedatawere
obtainedfromMTRCon:

37

buildingarea(ingrossfloorarea,orGFA)byuse(residential,office,
retailshopping,hotel/serviceapartments,andother);
scale(sizeofsiteinhectaresandtotalgrossfloorareaof
development);
density(plotratio=buildingarea/landarea)andverticality(heightof
buildings);
mixuseattributes(heterogeneityindex,rangingfrom0forsingleuse
settingsto1formaximallymixedusesettings).1

Amongthe5DsdiscussedinChapterTwo,thesevariableslargelycapture
Density(e.g.,plotratio)andDiversity(e.g.,landusemixing).Whileinitial
effortsweremadetocompileDesignmetrics(suchaspedestrianconnectivity
indicesandmeasuresofsidewalkcompleteness)forR+Pprojects,thisproved
difficultnotonlybecauseoftheunavailabilityofprecollecteddatabutalso
becauseoftheinherentsubjectivityofthesubjectmatter.Forthisreason,the
decisionwasmadenottoincludedesignmeasuresinconstructingthetypology
butinsteadtoconductseparatecasestudyanalysesofR+Pprojectsfocusedon
urbandesignelements(presentedinthenextchapter).

Inbuildingatypology,thestatisticaltechniqueofclusteranalysiswasused.The
processinvolvedcombiningcasesintoclustersonthebasisoftheirsimilarity
acrossbuiltenvironmentvariables.Theprocessinvolvesiterativelycombining
similarlikecasestoformalimitedsetofclusters.2Atreediagram,calleda
dendogram,ofR+Pprojectsthatwereiterativelyjoinedonthebasisoftheir
sharedlanduseanddensityattributesisshowninFigureA.1.1ofAppendixA.3
1

This was based on the measurement of an Entropy Index =

{ -k [ (pi) (ln pi)]}/(ln k) wherein: (0 EI 1) and K = # of Land use types (in this case,
K=5); pi: GFA-based proportion of land use in type i; and i : Land use type (residential,
office, retail, hotel and others).
2

Theprocessinvolvedcombiningcasesintoclustersonthebasisoftheirnearnessto
eachotherwhenexpressedassquaredEuclideandistances.Usingthetechniqueof
agglomerativehierarchicalclustering,clustersweresequentiallyformedbygrouping
casesintoevenlargerclustersuntilallR+Pcasesweremembersofasinglecluster.
3
Thedendogramshowstheclustersbeingsequentiallycombinedandthenormalized
valuesofthecoefficient(i.e.,squaredEuclideandistances)ateachstep.Thejudgmental
partofclusteranalysisisdecidingatwhatstagetostopjoiningclusters.Thisis
normallydonewhenthedistancecoefficientsdramaticallyincreasefromone
agglomerationsteptoanother.Visually,thisisbeforethehorizontallines(denotingthe
joiningofclusters)inthedendogrambecomenoticeablelonger(approximatelyinthe
middleofthegraphbetweenrescaleddistanceclustercombinescoresof10and15.

38

FivetypesofR+Pprojectswerefoundamongthe25MTRstations.(Twostations
withR+Pprojectswerenotgroupedintoclustersbecauseoftheiridiosyncratic
andthusuncharacteristicnature,thustheyweretreatedasungrouped).The
titlesassignedtothesefivetypesofR+Pprojectsbasedontheirbuilt
environmentattributesareasfollows:

HighRiseOffice(HO):highrise,predominantlyofficeusesonsmall
sites;
HighRiseResidential(HR):highrise,predominantlyresidentialuses
onsmallsites;
MidRiseResidential(MR):mediumdensity,predominantlyhousing
projectsonmediumsizeplots;
LargeScaleResidential(LR):predominantlyresidentialusesonlarge
siteswithcomparativelylowplotratios;and
LargeMixedUse(LM):mixtureofhousing,offices,retail,hotels,and
othersonlargesiteswithmediumplotratios.

Figure3.1mapsthelocationsofthesefiveR+Pprototypes(spreadamong25
MTRstations).Figure3.2summarizesthebuiltenvironmentfeaturesofeach
typebypresentingstatisticalaveragesforthevariablesusedtoformclusters
i.e.,plotratios,scale(GFAofbuildingarea),sitearea,andlandusemixes
(expressedinbothpiechartformandasa01entropymixeduseindex).
Figure3.2alsoliststhestationswhichbelongtoeachR+Pprototype.

DifferencesinthebuiltenvironmentsofeachclassofR+Pstationsare
highlightedinFigure3.2.Amongthefiveprototypes,averageplotratiosrange
fromahighof14.84(HighRiseOffices)toalowof3.51(LargeScale
Residential)i.e.,morethanafourfolddifferential.IntermsoftotalGFA,
LargeScaleResidentialprojectslikeTungChungandKowloonBaytendtobe
thebiggestinsize,withameanGFAof670,000squaremeters,owingtotheir
typicallylargelandtracts(onaverage,19.5hectares).HighRiseOffices,found
mostlyinthehistoricalurbancoreofHongKongisland,ontheotherhand,tend
tobeoncomparativelysmallsites(mean=0.40hectares)andforthisreason,
averagethelowestgrossfloorbuildingarea(mean=59,700squaremeters).

Basedonboththepiechartsandmixeduse(entropy)indicesinFigure3.2,R+P
projectsarealsoseentovarymarkedlyintermsoflandusemixes.Asindicated
bytitle,theLargeScaleMixedUsetypeofR+Pprojectisthemostdiverse.
Amongthethreestationsinthiscategory(Kowloon,TseungKwanO,andHong

39

Figure3.1.LocationsofR+PProjectsbyBuiltEnvironmentTypes

Kong),onaverage40.5%ofGFAisdevotedtohousingand28%forofficeuses,
followedby20%forotheractivities(likehotels,governmentfunctions,and
recreationalfacilities)and11.4%forretailshopping.

3.3

StationAreaTypology:HousingPatterns

GiventhefocusgiventoresidentialdevelopmentaroundMTRstations,asecond
typologywasconstructedbasedonhousingtypesanddesigns.Using2001(the
mostrecentavailable)censusdataonhousing,thefollowingvariableswere
recordedfor500metercatchmentsofthe50MTRstationsthatexistedthatyear:

Numberofhousingunitswithindistanceringsof080m,80200m,and
200500mofstations;
Shareofhousingunitswithin500mbytype:private(market
transactedandgenerallyhighestqualityhousing);public(rentalunits
atcomparativelylowprices);andsubsidized(governmentprovided
housingsoldatadiscountedprice);and

40

Site Area=0.40ha

9%
13%

Site Area=3.41ha
9% 1%

Site Area=0.57ha

32%

Mixed

Mixed

Mixed

0.30

0.42

0.22

78%

4 stations
-ADMIRALTY
-CENTRAL
-MONG KOK
-SHEUNG WAN

2%

Site Area=19.48ha
11 1%
%
5%

GFA
=60.06ha

Site Area=8.27ha
20
%

Mixed

0.36

66%

4 stations
-SHAU KEI WAN
-WAN CHAI
-SAI WAN HO
-TIN HAU

GFA=67.01ha

Plot Ratio=6.86

GFA=14.82ha

Plot Ratio=3.51

Plot Ratio=12.90

GFA=7.28ha

Plot Ratio=6.99

Plot Ratio=14.84

GFA=5.97ha

LM

LR

MR

HR

HO

90
%

8 stations
-FORTRESS HILL
-TIU KENG LENG
-CHAI WAN
-CHOI HUNG
-KWAI FONG
-TSING YI
-TSUEN WAN
-HANG HAU

Mixed
11
%

83
%

0.62
28
%

3 stations
5 stations
-HENG FA CHUEN -KOWLOON
-KOWLOON BAY -TSEUNG KWAN O
-HONG KONG
-TUNG CHUNG
-OLYMPIC
-TAI KOO
Res
Oth
Hot

Off
Ret

Figure3.2.ListingofMTRStationsineachBuiltEnvironmentTypeand
StatisticalMeanStatisticsforkeyclusteringvariables.

Averagehouseholdsizewithin500mdistancering.

Ahierarchicalclusteringroutinewasusedtoconstructthetypology,producing
thedendogramshowninFigureA.1.2inAppendix1.

Inall,sixdistincttypesofhousingdevelopmentwerefoundamongMTR
stations.4ThesearesummarizedinFigure3.3.Briefly,thesixhousingtypesare
asfollows:

DisneylandResortandSunnyBaywerenotincludedinthetypologybecauseno
housingexistedaroundthesestationsin2001.Additionally,theMeiFoostationis
omittedfromtheanalysisbecauseoftheidiosyncraticnatureofitshousing(largescale
housingbutprivateunits).
4

41

41
%

Housing Pattern
Donut

Ownership Type
Private

Scale and Size

Stations
Small # & Big Size
3 stations
ADMIRALTY
CENTRAL
SHEUNG WAN

81.7%

13.5%

200m

500m

6,692units

100.0
%

4.8%

3.48 per unit

80m

Even Spread

Private

53.6%

Large # & Small Size

*17 stations

18,316units

6.2%
3.7%

32.8%
13.6%

200m

500m

90.1
%

80m

Core Housing

3.10 per unit

Private

Small # & Small Size

85.9.%
7.0%
11.3
%

14.1%

81.7
%

0.0%
200m

500m

3,561units
3.19 per unit

4 stations
HENG FA
CHUEN
KOWLOON
LAI CHI KOK
TUNG CHUNG

80m

Even Spread

Private-Public

Large #

**17 stations

Small #

2 stations
TIU KENG LENG
TSEUNG KWAN
O

22,078units

59.8%
34.2
%
54.0
%

24.8%
15.4%
11.8
%

200m

500m

80m

3.25 per unit

Donut

Subsidized

92.6%
0.3%

20.5
%

7,437units
7.4%

79.3
%

0%

3.22 per unit

200m

500m

80m

Near-Station Housing

Public Large # & Big Size

21,261units

56.1%

22.1%

13.1
%

21.8%

17.4
%
69.5
%

500m

200m

4 stations
CHOI HUNG
HANG HAU
KWAI HING
LAI KING

3.66 per unit

80m

Figure3.3.TypologyofHousingDevelopmentsAroundMTRStations

42

Note:
* 17 stations
** 17 stations
CAUSEWAY BAY
CHAI WAN
FORTRESS HILL
CHEUNG SHA WAN
HONG KONG
DIAMOND HILL
JORDAN
KOWLOON BAY
MONG KOK
KOWLOON TONG
NORTH POINT
KWAI FONG
OLYMPIC
KWUN TONG
PRINCE EDWARD
LAM TIN
QUARRY BAY
LOK FU
SAI WAN HO
NGAU TAU KOK
SHAM SHUI PO
PO LAM
TAI KOO
SHAU KEI WAN
TIN HAU
SHEK KIP MEI
TSIM SHA TSUI
TAI WO HAU
TSUEN WAN
TSING YI
WAN CHAI
WONG TAI SIN
YAU MA TEI
YAU TONG
Figure3.3.(Continued).TypologyofHousingDevelopments
AroundMTRStations

1) Private,SmallScale,DonutPatternHousing:Threestationareas
(Admiralty,Central,andSheungWan)haveexclusivelyprivate
housing,comprisingrelativelysmallnumbersofunits(onaverage,
6,692within500m),mostofwhichareawayfromthestationi.e.,a
donutpatterninthatthereisaholeinthecenter,nearthestation,
withmosthousinginthe200500distancering.

2) PredominantlyPrivate,LargeScale,EvenlySpreadHousing:Themost
MTRstations(17inall)havepredominantly(onaverage,over90%)
privatehousinginlargescaleprojects(onaverage,18,316units)and
comparativelysmallhouseholdsizes.Theseunitstendtobemore
evenlydistributedwithinthe500meterstationcatchmentwhilemost
(53.6%)ofhousingisinthe200500mdistancering,sincethisringis
muchlargerinarea,thehousingtendstobemoreevenlyspreadthan
inmoststationsettings.

43

3) PredominantlyPrivate,SmallScale,CoreHousing:Fourstationareas
(HengFaChuen,Kowloon,LaiChiKok,andTungChung)feature
predominantlyprivatehousing(onaverage,81.7%),insmallscale
projects(onaverage,3,561units),andconcentratednearthestation
(around86%lieswithin80mofstations).
4) Mixed,LargeScale,EvenlySpreadHousing:Seventeenstationareas
averagethewidestmixofprivate,public,andsubsidizedhousing,
generallyofalargescale(onaverage,22,078units)andfairlyevenly
spreadwithinthe500mstationcatchment.
5) PredominantlySubsidized,SmallScale,DonutPatternHousing:Two
stations(TiuKengLengandTseungKwanO)arecharacterizedby
mainlysubsidized,fairlysmallscalehousingthatissituatedmainly
awayfromthestation(i.e.,inadonutshapedpattern).
6) PredominantlyPublic,LargeScale,NearStationHousing:Fourstation
areas(ChoiHung,HangHau,KwaiHing,andLaiKing)feature
predominantlypublichousingofafairlylargescale,with
comparativelylargehouseholdsizes,andphysicallyfairlycloseto
stations(78%lieswithin200meters).

DoeshousingdevelopmentdifferamongMTRstationswithR+Pstationsand
thosewithout?DoesitdifferamongthefivetypesofR+Pstationsettings?These
questionswereexploredbycrosstabulatingthedatafromthetwocluster
analyses.Table3.1showstheresults.ComparedtononR+Pstations,those
withR+Pprojectstendto:

44

Table3.1.ArithmeticMeansofHousingStatisticsforMTRStationswithR+P
Projects:ComparisontoNonR+PStationsandAmongFiveR+PBuilt
EnvironmentTypes

HousingUnits

Distribution
Housing within500m
HousingUnits
Units
(%)
SharebySupplyType(%) Residents
Within
per
500- 200- 80500m
200 80
0 Public Subsidized Private
Unit
25R+P
17,433 51.7 26.3 21.9
23.3
16.2
60.4
HO
(highrise
offices)
10,398 77.0 10.6 12.4
0.0
0.0
100.0
HR
(highrise
residential)
20,607 51.0 33.0 16.1
19.6
9.8
70.7
MR
(midrisere
sidential)
20,922 56.7 34.4 9.0
36.1
27.5
36.4
LR
(largescale
residential)
20,442 32.7 19.0 48.3
19.2
15.9
64.9
LM
(largescale
mixuses)
5,333 46.2 15.6 38.2
13.6
19.7
66.7
26NonR+P
15,617 50.8 24.4 17.2
32.8
5.1
54.5
51Station
Total
16,507 51.2 25.3 19.5
28.1
10.5
57.4

havemorehousingunitswithin500meters;

havehighersharesofhousingclusteredwithin80metersofstations
(21.9%versus17.2%);

45

3.07

3.44

2.48

2.97

3.21

3.26
3.39
3.23

havehighersharesofprivatehousingandsubstantiallylowersharesof
subsidizedhousing;and

averagesmallerhouseholdsizes,indicatingfewerchildrenperhousehold.

AmongtypesofR+Pprojects,Table3.1reveals:

housingwasmostconcentratedinstationareaswithlargescale
residentialR+Pprojectsandleastconcentratedinareaswith
predominantlyhighriseoffices;

thestrongestprivatehousingorientationwasinstationsareaswithhigh
riseofficeandhighriseresidentialhousing,whilethelargestsharesof
publicandsubsidizedhousingwasinstationareaswithmidrise
residentialR+Pprojects;and

thelargesthouseholdsizeswereinstationareascharacterizedbyhighrise
officeR+Pprojectsandthesmallestwereinthosewithpredominantly
highriseresidentialR+Pprojects.

3.4 TypologiesandRidershipPerformance

Asnotedearlier,partofthelogicbehindbuildingatypologyofR+Pprojectsand
stationareahousingwastoexplorewhetherMTRridershipvariedsignificantly
amonggroupings.Onehypothesisexploredwaswhetherstationswithmore
mixeduseR+Pprojectsandlandusepatternsexperiencedamoreeven
distributionofriderswithintheweekday(i.e.,peakandoffpeak)andbetween
weekdaysandweekends.Notably,settingswithshoppingandretailintermixed
withhousingandofficescouldbeexpectedtogeneraterailtripsthataremore
evenlydistributed.Moreover,onemightexpectabalanceoftravelflowsin
mixedretailofficehousingsettingsi.e.,stationsfunctionsasbothtriporigins
anddestinationsatallhoursoftheday.ExperienceswithmixeduseTODsin
settingsasvariedasArlington,VirginiaandStockholm,Swedengenerallybear
outthesehypotheses:morebalanced,mixeduseenvironmentsproducedmore
balancedtransitdemand(Cervero,etal.,2004).DoesthesameholdinHong
Kong?

Ananalysisofmeanstatisticsonridership,ridershipgrowth(20012005),and

46

variousbalanceindicesrevealednostrongpatternamongstationsbasedon
typesofR+Pproject.ThisisrevealedbyTable3.2

ComparedtoNonR+Pstations,Table3.2showsthatstationswithR+Pprojects:

averagedlowerweeklyridershipbutexperiencedsubstantiallyhigher
ridershipgrowthbetween2001and2005(13.2%versus8.8%);

hadproportionallymorepeakmorningthanpeakeveningridership;

hadsimilarsharesofstationentriesandexitsinthemorningaswellas
balancebetweenweekdayandweekendridership;and

werecomparablyaccessibletotheCentralStation(i.e.,bothgroups
averaged17minutespeakperiodtraveltotheCentralStation).

AmongthefiveclassesofR+Pstations,Table3.2shows:

substantiallyhigherweeklyridershipforhighriseofficeR+Pstations;

dramaticallyfasterridershipgainsforlargescalemixeduseR+Pstations;
and

themostbalanceinpeakperiodstationentriesandexitsatlargescale
residentialstations.

WhileridershippatternsdonotvarydramaticallybytypesofR+Pstation
settingsandthebalancedflowhypothesesformixedusesettingswerenotborne
out,thefindingofsubstantiallyhealthierridershipgainsforstationswithR+P
projectsversusthosewithoutsuggestsR+Pstationscouldbeproducingmore
thandirectfinancialbenefitstoMTRC.Thegainsinfareboxreceiptsfrom
ridershipgrowthmightbeasidebenefit.Moreover,noneofthesetypologies
presentedinthischapterreflecturbandesigncharacteristicsandthustheTOD
likepedestrianorientationofmanyR+Pprojects.InChapterFour,theinfluence
ofR+Pprojects,andinparticularTODdesigns,onridershipisexploredfurther.
Butfirst,itisusefultogaingreaterinsightsintotheurbandesigncharacteristics
andpedestrianprovisionsofR+Pprojectsandtheirstationsurroundings.For
thispurpose,weturnedtocasestudies,thefocusofthenextchapter.

47

Table3.2.ArithmeticMeansofHousingStatisticsforMTRStationswithR+P
Projects:ComparisontoNonR+PStationsandAmongFiveR+PBuilt
EnvironmentTypes

In&Out
Ridership
Balance
Weekday/ Travel
Weekly
Change AM/PM
Index
Weekend
Time
AM PM
Ridership
(%) Balance
Balance (Min.)
13.2
25R+P
635,091
1.16
0.62 0.74
1.65
17
HO
(highrise
3.5
offices)
1,125,397
0.80
0.53 0.57
1.82
4
HR
(highrise
residential)
522,468
7.3
1.13
0.55 0.75
1.65
12
MR
(midriser
15.4
esidential)
651,144
1.23
0.58 0.77
1.58
22
LR
(largescale
10.0
residential)
519,049
1.29
0.78 0.86
1.59
22
LM
(largescale
67.0
mixuses)
361,539
1.30
0.59 0.68
1.63
14
8.8
26NonR+P
670,888
1.07
0.64 0.74
1.64
18
51Station
10.9
Total
653,341
1.11
0.63 0.74
1.64
17
Note:
WeeklyRidership:numberofweeklyriders,2005
RidershipChange:Percentincreaseinweeklyridership,2001to2005
AM/PMBalance:(AMridership/PMridership)onweekdays,2005
| In Out |
In&OutBalanceIndex= 1
whereInequalsstationentries
In + Out
andOutequalsstationexits;computedforbothAMandPMpeaks.
Rangesfrom0to1,with0indicatingmaximumskewness(i.e.,only
entriesorexits)and1denotingmaximumbalance(comparablecountsof
entriesandexits).
Weekday/WeekendBalance:[5weekdayridership/(weekendridership*2.5)]
TravelTime:TraveltimetoCentralStation(minutes)

48

Reference

Cervero,R.,S.Murphy,C.Ferrell,N.Goguts,Y.Tsai.2004.TransitOriented
DevelopmentinAmerica:Experiences,Challenges,andProspects.Washington,D.C.:
TransportationResearchBoard,TCRPReport102.

49

50

ChapterFour

CaseStudiesofR+PProjects:UrbanDesign
andPartnershipArrangements
4.1

CaseSitesandDataCollection

TogaininsightsintotheurbandesignsofR+Pprojectsandtheirsurroundingsas
wellaspartnershiparrangements,casestudieswerecarriedout.Inconsultation
withMTRplanningstaff,onerepresentativecasefromeachofthefiveR+P
prototypeswasselected.Additionally,asabasisofcomparison,caseswere
chosenfromtwoothersettings:MTRstationswithoutR+PprojectsandHong
KongneighborhoodswithoutMTRservices.Table4.1liststhechosencasestudy
sites.FivestationswithR+Pprojectswerestudied,spanningthefiveR+P
prototypes.Figure4.1showsthelocationsofthesefiveprojects.Table4.1also
liststhethreenonR+Pstationsthatwerestudied:onewithmainlyofficeuses
(QuarryBay),onewithpredominantlyresidentialuses(NgauTauKok),andone
withmixedofficesandretail(CausewayBay).ThetwononMTRserved
neighborhoodswerechosentorepresentbothurbanandsuburbanlikesettings.

Foreachcasestudysite,aQualityofCatchmentAreasurveywasconductedin
midMay2007.InconsultationwithMTRCplanningstaff,between3and5
walkingcorridorswerechosenthatconnectedtheMTRstation(orcommunity
centerfornonrailneighborhoods)toadestinationonorneartheedgesofa500
meterradiusfromthestation.Figure4.2showstheselectedwalkwaycorridors
fortwocasestudysites:HongKongandCausewayBaystations.Thefield
surveyorwalkedtheentiredistanceofeachcorridor,takingphotographsand
recordinginformationon:walkingdistance;sidewalkandfootbridgeprovisions;
signage;retail/consumerserviceprovisionsandactivities;pedestriancirculation;
multimodalconnectionsandprovisionsformotorizedvehicleaccess;andopen
space,landscapingandpedestrianamenities.Appendix2presentstherecorded
surveyresultsforeachcasealongwithphotographsandamapshowing
buildinglocationsandwalkingcorridors.

InthecourseofstudyingthefiveR+Pstations,informationwasalsoobtainedon
partnershiparrangementsnotablytherolesofpublicandprivatesector
stakeholdersinprojectconstructionandmanagement,mechanismsforsharing
costsandprofits,andassetownership.Section4.5ofthischapterpresentsthese
findings.

51

Table4.1.CaseStudySites

R+PCases

MTRStation
Admiralty
TinHau

HangHau

TungChung
HongKong

NonR+PCases

R+PType
HighRise
Office(HO)
HighRise
Residential
(HR)
MidRise
Residential
(MR)
LargeScale
Residential(LR)
LargeScale
MixedUse(LM)

MTR
Station

Primary
LandUse

NonStationCases

Neighborhood

Setting

Quarry
Bay
NgauTau
Kok

Office

EastSimSha
Tsui
Residential South
Horizons

Urban

Causeway
Bay

Office
&Retail

Suburban

Figure4.1.CaseStudyMTRStationswithR+PProjects

52

Hong Kong

Causeway Bay

4
3
1
2

2
5
T
6

Figure4.2.ExamplesofSelectedWalkingCorridorsforCaseStudyField
Surveys:HongKongandCausewayBayStations

4.2

R+PCases

ThissectionsummarizesthecasestudyfindingsforeachofthefiveR+Pbuilt
environmentprototypes:Admiralty(HighRiseOfficeHO);TinHau(High
RiseResidentialHR);HangHau(MidRiseResidentialMR);TungChung
(LargeScaleResidentialLR);andHongKong(LargeScaleMixedUseLM).
WhilenotnecessarilyafullyrepresentativesampleofR+Pprojects,thecasesites
arenonethelessillustrativeofthekindsofR+PdevelopmentsMTRChaspursued
overtime.

Admiralty(HO)

TheR+PprojectaboveMTRsAdmiraltystationoccupiesa0.7hectaresite,
featuringhighriseofficetowerswithlowerlevelretailinanenclosedshopping
mallconfiguration(Figure4.3).ItrepresentstheHighRiseOffice(HO)typeof
R+Pproject.Openedin1980,Admiraltystationliesinthemidstofanactive
commercialdistrictneartheheartofdowntownHongKong.Itsmixeduseair
rightsdevelopmentisamongMTRCsearlygenerationR+Pprojects.

TheAdmiraltyStationreceiveshighmarksforphysicalintegration(Photo4.1).
Vertically,theupperlevelofficesaswellasthelowerlevelPTI(publictransport

53


Figure4.3.AdmiraltyStationR+PProject:Site,BuiltEnvironment
Attributes,andStationLocation

interchange)functionsaredirectlytiedtothestationconcourseviabanksof
elevatorsandescalators.Horizontally,welllitentrancesopenontosurrounding
streetsandanetworkofgradeseparatedfootbridgeslinktosurroundingblocks,
allowingpedestrianstoavoidstreetleveltrafficconflicts.Thesitealsohas
amplepedestrianamenitiesincludingopenspace(HartcourtGarden)and
multiplevistasofthebay.

TinHau(HR)

TheTinHaustationsR+Pprojectismainlyahighriseresidentialtowerona
fairlysmallsite,producingaplotratioabove14(Figure4.4).Completedin1989,
thisprojectisoftheHighRiseResidential(HR)R+PtypeandamongMTRCs
earliestportfoliosofR+Pprojects.Thesurroundingneighborhoodconsists
mainlyofresidentialtowersandanagingretaildistrict.

54


Photo4.1.AdmiraltyStation:VerticalandHorizontalIntegration

AsrevealedbyPhoto4.2,theTinHaustationisconnectedtosurroundingsvia
atgradesidewalks.Ithasampleprovisionsforcarparkingandbusconnections,
althoughthesomewhatimposingscaleoftheseintermodalfacilitiesdetracts
fromthepedestrianenvironment.Apocketparkdoesabutthestation,however,
aniceamenityinlightoftheareashighdensities.Overall,TinHausR+P
projectwasdesignedmainlywithfinancialobjectivesinmindwiththequalityof
pedestrianenvironmentgivenmodestattention.

55


Figure4.4.TinHauStationR+PProject:Site,BuiltEnvironment
Attributes,andStationLocation

56

MTR Entrance/Exit

Public Transport Interchange

Neighborhood

Large Parking Area

Photo4.2.TinHauStation:ConnectivityandParkingProvisions

HangHau(MR)

Completedandopenedin2005,theR+PprojectattheHangHaustationmarksa
changingperspectiveamongMTRCmanagementabouturbandesignandthe
relationshipofR+Ptosurroundingcommunities.Notably,astrongemphasisis
giventoplacemakingandTOD,notunlikewhatonefindsatsuburban
Scandinavianrailstations,asdiscussedinthepreviouschapter.

HangHausR+Pprojectisalmostexclusivelyresidential.Withamoderatesize
siteandaplotratioofnearly8,itbelongstotheMidRiseResidential(MR)
R+Ptype(Figure4.5).Some200metersbeyondthestationispublicand
subsidizedhousingbuiltseveraldecadesago.

AsrevealedbyPhoto4.3,HangHaustationsR+Pprojecttendstotheneedsof
residents,shoppers,andpedestriansquitewell.TheR+Pprojectclearly
distinguishestheprivateandpublicrealms.Owneroccupiedapartmentsare

57


Figure4.5.HangHauStationR+PProject:Site,BuiltEnvironment
Attributes,andStationLocation

directlytiedtoanicelylandscapegardenandprivateclubhousethatsitsabove
thestation.Residentsalsohavedirectelevatorconnectionstothestation
concourseandlowerlevelshoppingmall.Aphalanxofsecondlevelfootbridges
linkstheshoppingmallandstationtothesurroundingneighborhood.Overall,
HangHausR+Pprojecthasacomfortable,humanscalefeelandadesignthat
notonlyinstillsasenseofplacebutalsoprotectsthefinancialinvestmentsof
tenants.

58

Integrated Residential Area

Community Club atop the Station

Integrated Shopping Mall

Footbridge

Photo4.3.HangHauStation:PedestrianIntegrationandAmenities

TungChung(LR)

SituatedonMTRsairportextensionline,theTungChungstationsR+Pproject
wasbuiltatafundamentallydifferentscalethanmostofitspredecessors.
Occupyinga21.7hectareparcel,TungChungwasconceptualizedandbuilt
alongthelinesofamasterplannednewtown,comprisingpredominantly
residentialhousingintermixedwithretailshops,offices,andahotelnexttothe
station(Figure4.6).TungChungwasalsodesignedwithTODprinciplesin
mind(Photo4.4).Severalhundredmetersfromthestationliesanarcof30plus
storyresidentialtowers,connectedtothetowncenterbyanetworkofcovered
walkwaysandfootbridges.Uponexitingthestation,MTRpatronsaregreeted
byaspacious,attractivelylandscapedcivicsquaredottedwithpublicart.Thus
ratherthanbeingoverwhelmedbyshadowcastinghighrisetowers,asfoundin
thedenserpartsofHongKong,thoseleavingthestationstepintoaniceopen
spacethatwelcomessunlight.ThefeelofwalkinginandaroundtheTung
ChungstationisqualitativelydifferentthanthatfoundatolderMTRstations.

59

Figure4.6.TungChungStationR+PProject:Site,BuiltEnvironment
Attributes,andStationLocation

Withmosthousingfiveormoreminutesfromthestation,thedesignersofTung
ChungsR+Pprojectwereparticularsensitivetoconcernsoversafetyand
security.Thestationconcourseandadjoiningmallarebrightlylitatnight.Sois
thenetworkofprotectedpedestrianwaysthatlinktosurroundingtowers.
Throughouttheproject,cartrafficandpedestriancirculationarecompletely
separated(Figure4.7).

60

Station Square

Mall & Station

Pedestrian Space in Mall

Footbridge to Residential Towers

Photo4.4.TungChungStation:PedestrianProvisionsandAmenities

Figure4.7.SecondLevelSkybridgeNetworkatTungChungStation

61

HongKong(LM)

Openedin1998asanintermodalstationandeasternterminusoftheairport
extension,theHongKongstationanditsairrightsdevelopmentshowsthatTOD
designsneednotbelimitedtogreenfieldsandsuburbs.Situatedintheheartof
HongKongsbustlingcentralbusinessdistrict,themixeduseR+Pprojectat
HongKongstationnetsoutatamoderateplotratioof7.3owingtothe5.7
hectareparcelitsitson(Figure4.8).Builtaspartofacityledwaterfront
redevelopmentinitiative,thestationanditsenvironshaveasurprisingly
generousamountofgreeneryandopenspace(Photo4.5).

TheHongKongstationisaveritablebeehiveofactivity.Anchoredbythe
toweringInternationalFinancialCenter(IFC),HongKongstationisthe
internationalfaceofHongKong.AFourSeasonshotelalsooccupiesthesite.
Thestationssubterraneanandgroundlevelsarefunctionallytiedtotheairport
line,buslines,theStarFerry,taxis,andaPublicLightminibusterminus.An
airportcheckinfacilityinthestationallowspassengerstohoponexpresstrains
andgodirectlytopassportcontrol.Acavernousundergroundpedestrian
passagewaywithfastmovinghorizontalescalatorsconnectstheHongKongand
Centralstations.Atthesecondlevelthestationconnectstoamodernshopping
mall.Beyondthestationsite,anetworkoffootbridgeslinkssurroundingoffices
andtheharborfront.Wellplacedsignageanddigitalscreensconveniently
directpedestrianstodestinations,enhancingtheareaslegibility.Thestrong
accentplacedonpublicart,openspace,greenery,andcivicareascontributesto
thesitesaestheticismandsenseofplace.

62


Figure4.8.HongKongStationR+PProject:Site,BuiltEnvironment
Attributes,andStationLocation

4.3

NonR+PCases

AsrevealedbythefieldsurveysandphotographsinAppendix3,theselected
nonR+PcasesarepolaroppositesofR+Pstationswithregardstophysical
integration,connectivity,andpedestrianamenities.Thisisespeciallythecasein
comparisontoMTRsnewergenerationofR+Pprojects,suchasTungChungand
HongKongstations.AshasbeenthecaseelsewhereinHongKongwhere
growthpressureshaveoverwhelmedtheabilitytocomprehensivelyplan,the
nonR+Psitesgivemarginalattentiontotheneedsofpedestriansandinsome
instances,intermodalconnections.

63

Corridor to Central

Art Space

Multiple Layers

Well Placed Signage

Pedestrian Deck

Long Foot Bridge

Integrated Hotel

Footbridge to Harbor

Public Open Space

Photo4.5.HongKongStation:ConnectivityandAesthetics

NonR+PStations

Narrowsidewalksamidstbusystreettraffic(QuarryBay),stationsboundedby
busyhighways(NguaTauKok),andthelackofcoordinatedsignageandlegible
walkwaycorridors(CausewayBay)renderthenonR+Pcasesfarless
pedestrianfriendlythantheR+Pcases.Thephotographsandsurveynotesin
Appendix3suggestthatareasimmediatetothesestationsevolvedinanadhoc,
uncoordinatedmanner.Pedestrianamenitiestendtobefewandfarbetweenat
thesestations.StationsthemselveshardlyhavethesignatureTODfeatureof
functioningasneighborhoodhubs.

NonMTRServedNeighborhoods

ThetwocasestudyneighborhoodsnotservedbyMTRarealsomissingsomeof
thekeyelementsofwelldesignedR+Pprojects.One,EastSimShaTsui,liesina

64

dense,predominantlyresidentialpartofKowloon,servedbytheformer
KowloonCantonRailway(KCR)(thatmergedwithMTRCinDecember2007).
Howeverthesurroundingneighborhoodpredatestherailwaystation,which
wassitedbasedonlandavailability,nottoleverageredevelopment.Thus,the
neighborhoodsspatialpatternisnotstationbased;itlacksafocalpointand
muchinthewayofpedestrianamenities.

Theonecasestudysitewithnorailwayservices,SouthHorizons,reliesonbuses
toconnectresidentstothecentercity.Suburbanincharacter,theSouthHorizons
neighborhoodislacedbyatgraderoadwaysandsidewalks.Pedestrian
circulationismultidirectional,detractingfromtheareassenseofplace.

4.4

CaseStudySummary:LessonsonUrbanDesign

Asasupplementtothepreviouschaptersquantitativeanalysisforbuilding
typologiesofR+Pprojects,thequalitativeassessmentspresentedinthischapter
speaktothesofarmissingDofthe5DsDesign.Acomparisonoftheurban
designsofstationswithR+Pprojectsversusothercaseshighlightsthe
importanceofTODandplacemakingattributesdiscussedinChapterTwo:
connectivity,comfortability,aestheticism,amenities,legibility,andnatural
surveillance.Below,keydifferencesbetweenR+PandnonR+Pcasesinregards
totheseandotherelementsallofwhichbearontheneedsofpedestriansare
summarized.

HorizontalConnectivityandIntegration

AllR+PprojectsarephysicallyintegratedwithMTRstations(withtheexception
oftheTinHaucase)andsurroundingbuildings.Connectionstendtobedirect,
safe,wellilluminated,andspacious.ThenonR+Pstationcases(QuarryBay,
NgauTauKok,andCausewayBay)havenoticeablypoorerconnectivityand
fewerpedestrianamenities(Photo4.6).Footbridgesfromnearbyresidential
towersthatabruptlystopshortofrailstationswerefoundintwoinstances.

65

Photo4.6.ContrastsinPhysicalIntegrationandConnectivity:QuarryBayand
AdmiraltyStations

VerticalConnectivityandIntegration

MostR+Pstationsdoagoodjoboflinkingconnectingmodesofboth
motorizedandnonmotorizedtrafficthatoperateadifferentlevels.Typically
groundfloorsandbelowaredevotedtomotorizedtransportcarparkingand
buses.Abovegroundlevelsaremostlyforpedestriansandretailfunctions.
Thusmovementconflictsareavoidedandaccidentsreduced,courtesyofgrade
separation.Stationaccess/egressbycarandbusismoreefficientandconvenient;
walkingtoandfromstationsissaferandmoredirect.Incontrast,pedestrians
andcarstendtocomingleinthenonR+Pcases,creatinglesssecureandmore
chaoticwalkingenvironments(Photo4.7).

66


Photo4.7.ContrastsinPhysicalIntegrationandConnectivity:CausewayBay
andHongKongStations

BlendingRetailandPedestrianCorridors

MostR+Pprojectsstrategicallylinkpedestriancorridorsandinstationretail
activities.Thiscreatessynergiesbyenablingrailpatronstotakecareofpersonal
needswhilealsogeneratingretailsalesrevenues.Insomeinstances,shops
generatenewpublictransittripsbyfunctioningasrailserveddestinations.
Typically,convenienceretailbuiltaspartofR+Pprojectsisplacednearstation
entrancesoralongshelteredwalkways(e.g.,HangHauandTungChung).This
notonlyavoidstheclutteringofretailandrailrelatedfunctionswithinstations,
butalsoallowsonestopshoppingintemperaturecontrolledsettings,whichis
particularlyvaluedwhenitishotandhumid.TungChungs24hourstation
arearetailandbrightlylitfootbridgenetworkalsoinstillsasenseofsecurity.
AmongthenonR+Pstationsstudied,blankpassagewaysandminimalretail
provisionscreateatotallydifferentwalkingexperiencelessconvenient,less
attractive,lessmemorable(Photo4.8).Relianceonstairwellsinlieuofescalators,
suchasattheNguaTauKokstation,alsomakeschanginglevelsdifficultforthe
elderlyandthosewithphysicaldisabilities.
67

Photo4.8.ContrastsinPedestrianRetailBlending:NgauTauKokandTung
ChungStations

AmenitiesandOpenness

MostR+Pstationswinhighmarksforcreatingattractivepublicspacesthatboth
railcommutersrushingtotheirdestinationsandthosetakingacasualstrollcan
enjoy.Inadditiontothepresenceofamenitieslikepublicartandstreet
furniture,manyR+PstationareasalsohaveampleopenspacebyHongKong
standardsintheformofpocketparks(e.g.,AdmiraltyandTinHau),public
squares(e.g.,HangHauandTungChung),publicparks(e.g.,TinHauandHong
Kong),andgreencorridors(e.g.,HongKongandTungChung).Theprovisionof
airyopenspaceisallthemoreappreciatedgiventhehighriseprofile
surroundingstationslikeHongKongandAdmiralty.Becauseoftheirsuburban
locations,somenonR+Pcasesalsohaveopenspace,althoughtherearegenerally
fewerpedestrianamenitiesinthesesettings(Photo4.9).

68

Photo4.9.ContrastsinPedestrianAmenitiesandOpenSpace:CausewayBay
andHongKongStations

LegibilityandFocus

R+Pstationsaregenerallyeasytoread,bothinandoutsideofstations.Clear
anddirectsightlines,goodsignage,andfootbridgeprovisionsofferassurances
thatpedestriansareontherightpathstotheirdestinations.Moreover,R+P
stationslikeHangHau,TungChung,andHongKongfunctionashubsofthe
immediateneighborhoodandprovideafocalpointforfuturedevelopment.
SomeofthenonR+Pstations,bycontrast,arefarlesslegible,reflectedbyeither
toolittleortooconfusingsignage,disruptedwalkingcorridors,andafairly
benignpresenceintheneighborhood(e.g.,QuarryBayandCausewayBay)
(Photo4.10).

69

Photo4.10.ContrastsinLegibilityandCommunityFocus:CausewayBayand
QuarryBay;HongKongandTungChung

4.5

InsightsintoR+PPartnershipArrangements

Institutionally,allR+Pprojectsinvolvepublicprivatepartnerships.Assuch,
theyarepotentialwinwinsituationsforallpartiesinvolved.Asnotedearlier,
theconductoffieldsurveysofR+Pprojectsprovidedinsightsintohowtheroles
andfunctionsofdifferentstakeholdersweresortedoutinthedevelopment
processspecificallywithregardstoprojectconstruction,management,cost
andprofitsharing,andassetownership.Mappingthisaccordingtospecificland
usesfurtherrevealedhowvariouspublicandprivatesectorroleswerespatially
distributed.

Figure4.9summarizesthearrangementthatevolvedfortheTungChungR+P
project.Thefigurealsoillustratesthepositioningoflanduseswithreferenceto
thestation.InthecaseofTungChungsR+Ppackage,thedeveloperconstructed
theprojectinconsultationwithMTRC.Enablingworks,likesitepreparationand
70

publicinfrastructure,wereoverseenbyMTRCthroughmultipleconcessions.
Financially,theprojectmovedforwardbythedeveloperpayingboththeland
premiumandalldevelopmentcosts.ThroughnegotiationswithMTRC,returns
oninvestmentweresharedforbothupfront(e.g.,paymentattenderaward)and
downstream(e.g.,propertysales)profits.

Figure4.9furtherrevealstheownershipandmanagementresponsibilitiesfor
specificlanduses.Residentialunitsareownedbyindividualshoweverthe
complexesthemselvesaremanagedbyMTRC.AsnotedinChapterOne,this
arrangementensures,bothfortenantsandMTRC,highqualityoperationand
maintenanceofresidentialtowers.Private,nonresidentialactivitiesareowned
andmanagedbythedeveloper,exceptforthesiteslodgingwhichismanaged
bythehoteloperator.Thedeveloperalsohasresponsibilityformanagingthe
townsquarewhilepublicentitiesarechargedwithoverseeinggovernmentand
communityfacilities,includingpublictransportinterchanges.

Appendix4providessimilardiagramsfortheotherfourR+Pcasestudysites:
Admiralty,HangHau,TinHau,andHongKongstations.Partnership
arrangementsvaryineachcasethoughforthemostpart,patternsaremore
similarthandifferente.g.,developerconstructionandupfrontpaymentof
developmentrights;privateownershipbutMTRCmanagementofhousing;and
governmentoversightofthepublicrealm.

71

Residential

Residential
Open
Space PTI Mall
Gov&Community
Residential
Towers

Office

Hotel
Bridge

Station
Mall+
Retail
Bridge

Office

Hotel

Town
Square

GIC
Public
(PostOffice Transport
andDay
Interchange
Nursery)
1.Construction
Developerbasedonrailway/developmentcoordinateddesign;enablingworksprovidedbyMTRC
(multiplepackages)
2.Mechanism
Developerpaidlandpremiumanddevelopmentcost Partofthe
Conditionsinlandgrant
forsharingcosts Investmentreturnsplitbyupfrontprofitandend
property
&profit
profitsharing
design
3.Ownershipof Individual
Developer
Common
Government
Asset
flatowners
areaofthe
mallandPTI
4.Management MTRC
Developer
Hotel
Developer
Governmentdelegatedto
operator
operator
Figure4.9.PartnershipArrangementsfordevelopingvariouscomponentsoftheTungChungR+PProject

72

ChapterFive

CorridorAnalysisofR+PProjects

5.1GrowthandTravelAlongMTRsNewRailLines

TheprevioustwochaptersusedtheR+Ptypologytoexaminedifferencesinbuilt
environmentsamongprojects.Thecasestudiesofurbandesign,moreover,
suggestednewerR+PprojectshaveembracedTODprinciplesmoresothantheir
predecessors.Thatis,thedesignsandbuiltenvironmentsofR+Pprojectsappear
tovaryasmuchbyageasbytypology.Forthisreason,thischapter
complementsthepreviousonebycomparingbuiltenvironmentsbythree
groupings:(1)earlylinesthe17R+PprojectsbuiltonMTRsoriginalnetwork
duringthe19791985period;(2)TseungKwanO(TKO)Line3R+Pprojects
builtinconjunctionwithurbanredevelopmentsincethelines2002opening;and
(3)TungChungLine5R+Pprojectsbuiltsincethelines1998openingin
concertwithbothcentralcityredevelopmentandsuburbannewtown
developmentonLantauIsland.Thekeydistinction,webelieve,liesbetween
R+Pprojectsfromtwoormoredecadesagoversusrecentgenerationprojects
builtintandemwithnewlinesandextensions.Givendifferencesinurban
character,wesuspecttherearealsosubtledifferencesinR+Pprojectsbetween
thetworecentlines:TKOversusTungChung.Thischapterclosesbycomparing
ridershipgrowthandtravelpatternsamongstationgroupings.

MTRsnewrailextensionshavebeensitedinsomeofthefastestgrowingareas
ofHongKongterritory.Figure5.1showsthatbetween2001and2006,
populationwithintheterritoryasawholegrewbyslightlylessthanonepercent.
IntheSaiKungsubdistrictinHongKongseasternreaches,theareaservedby
thenewTKOline,populationgrewby22.7%duringthisperiod.Tothewest,the
districtsservedbythenewTungChunglinegrewatcontrastingrates:6.7%for
thefairlybuiltupKwaiTsingsubdistrictversus53%foroutlyingLantauIsland.
ThebaselinevalueforLantauIsland,ofcourse,wasrelativelylow,thusin
aggregateterms,theothersubdistrictswitnessedlargepopulationincreases.
Still,therateofgrowthonLantauIslandisimpressiveforasixyearperiod.
WhethertheMTRraillinesspurredorrespondedtothisgrowthisasubjectof
debate.Mostlikely,abitofbothoccurred.

73

Figure5.1.ComparisonofPopulationGrowthRates
AmongSubdistrictsofHongKongTerritory:20012006

Withnumerousislands,isthmuses,coastalindentations,andmountains,Hong
Kongslandscapecreatesmanynaturalbottlenecks.Forthosetravelingbycars,
buses,andtrucks,thisoftentranslatesintoextremepeakperiodtraffic
congestion.Fromatransitagencyperspective,however,HongKongsnatural
corridorsinvitehighridership.Forthecorridorsservedbythetwonewlines,
railtransitscrucialmobilityroleisunderscoredbyFigure5.2.Thebridgeto
LantauIslandalongtheTungChungcorridorcarriedaround51,000vehiclesper
dayin2006;alongthisstretch,MTRcarriedaround75,000passengerseachday.
ThedifferentialwasfargreateralongtheTKOcorridor:64,000dailyvehicleson
thebridgeversus301,000dailyMTRpassengers.Clearly,ifrailservicesdidnot
existandpassengersinsteadhadtotakebuses,congestionwouldbefarworseat
thesechokepoints.MTRscriticalmobilityroleisfurtherhighlightedbythe
modalsplitstatisticsinFigure5.2.Fromatelephonesurveyconductedby
MTRCin2005,37%and54%ofresidentslivingnearTsingYiandTungChung
stationsrespectivelysaidtheytypicallytookMTRoneormoretimesperday.
AmongthosesurveyedalongtheTKOcorridor,thesharewas63%.This
contrastswitha29%modalsplitforsurveyedresidentslivingnearatallother
MTRstations.
74

Figure5.2.VehicleandRailPassengerCountsatBridges
andRailModalSplitsAlongNewMTR

5.2CorridorComparisonsofR+PBuiltEnvironments

MTRsTungChunglinerunsfromHongKongsdensecoretothegreenfieldsof
LantauIsland,terminatingattheTungChungnewtown.MTRCsfiveR+P
projectsalongthisstretcharesimilarlyvaried,asshowninFigure5.3.Locatedin
builtupareas,R+PprojectsattheKowloonandHongKongstationsaredense
andshowcasemultipleuses.AsonegoesfartheroutfromHongKongstation,
densitiesdeclineandhousingbecomesmoredominant.

FortheTKOline,theR+PprojectattheTseungKwanOstationdiffersfromthe
othertwo(Figure5.4).AllR+Pprojectsonthiscorridorareonreclaimedland,
howevertheprojectattheTseungKwanOstationisnotableforitswidervariety
oflandusesandlowernetdensity.Fromanurbandesignstandpoint,theR+P
projectatTseungKwanOstationalsohasmoreofaTODcharacter.

75

Tung Chung

Site Area=21.70ha

5.4 0.2 2.1

1.5 % %
%
%

90.8
%

MI = 0.25

Site Area=5.4ha

15.8
%

0.3
%

Site Area=16.02ha
%

16.3
%

9.1 2.3
% %

83.9
%

MI = 0.28

30.7km from HK 11.4km

GFA =109.62ha

Site Area=13.54ha

15.3 0.6
% %
7.5
%
72.3
%

Hong Kong
Plot Ratio=7.28

GFA =68.22ha

Kowloon
Plot Ratio=8.10

GFA =29.28ha

Olympic
Plot Ratio=4.26

GFA=103.08ha

Tsing Yi
Plot Ratio=5.42

Plot Ratio=4.76

Tung Chung

55.5
%

Site Area=5.71ha

24.6
%
14.3
%

21.1
%

GFA
=41.59 ha

61.1
%

MI = 0.52

MI = 0.73

MI = 0.57

5.2km

4.1km

0.0km

Figure5.3.TungChungCorridor:BuiltEnvironment
CharacteristicsoftheLines5R+PProjects.
Note:MI=MixedUseIndex;Landusecolorcodesforpiecharts:red=office,
yellow=retail,green=residential,blue=hotel,gray=other.

76

Tseung Kwan O

Site Area=3.23ha
6.6
%

GFA=28.96ha

2.5
%

20.1
%

93.4
%

MI = 0.15
6.5km from North Point

GFA
=14.22ha

Site Area=1.80ha

Site Area=5.55ha

12.3
%1.7

Hang Hau
Plot Ratio=7.90

GFA=25.38ha

Tseung Kwan O
Plot Ratio=5.22

Plot Ratio=7.86

Tiu Keng Leng

65.9
%

97.5
%

MI = 0.57

MI = 0.07

7.4km

8.6km

Figure5.4.TseungKwanOCorridor:BuiltEnvironment
CharacteristicsoftheLines5R+PProjects.
Note:MI=MixedUseIndex;Landusecolorcodesforpiecharts:red=office,
yellow=retail,green=residential,blue=hotel,gray=other.

AcomparisonofstatisticsonthreeoftheDsDensity,Diversity,andDistance
revealsdifferencesinR+PdevelopmentnotonlybetweenthetwonewMTR
linesbutmorenotablyincomparisontoR+PprojectsbuiltalongMTRsoriginal
lines.Table5.1showsthatrecentgenerationR+Pprojectstendtobelessdense
andcorrespondinglymoresuburbanincharacter.Stationspacingalongnewer
railcorridorsalsotendstobelonger.Additionally,olderR+Pprojectstendedto
concentratelargernumbersofhousingunitswithin500mofstations.R+P
projectsontheTKOLinestandoutintworespects:afocusonresidential
developmentandlargersharesofhousingunitsthatarepublicorsubsidized.

77

Table5.1.ComparisonofAveragesinDensity,Diversity,andDistance
AttributesofR+PProjectsAmongThreeGroupings:EarlyLines,Tseung
KwanOLine,andTungChungLine

5.3

RidershipPatterns

ChapterThreeexploredwhetherridershippatternsvariedamongthefivetypes
ofR+Pprojects.Nostrongrelationshipswerefound.Mighttherebepatterns
whenexaminedacrossthecorridorlevelgroupingofR+Pprojects?

WhileridershiphasbeenfairlystableonMTRsolderlines,ithassteadily
trendedupwardsonthenewerones.InthecaseoftheTungChungline,daily
patronagejumped40%between2001(threeyearsafteritsopening)and2005.
TheTKOlinedidnotevenexistin2001buttodaycarrieswelloverahalfmillion
dailypassengers.TheTKOline,however,haslessbalanceinpeakperiod
directionalflowsthaneitherMTRsoriginallinesortheTungChungline,owing

78

tothedominanceofresidentialdevelopmentarounditsstations.1Asnoted
before,manyresidentsalongtheTKOcorridorrelyheavilyonrailservices
nearlytwothirdsofthosesurveyedindicatedtheytakeMTRatleastonceaday.
Giventhelargesharesthatliveinpublicorsubsidizedhousing,thishigher
ridershipislikelyduemoretotransitcaptivitythananyaspectofthebuilt
environment.

Thisbriefdiscussionofstationarearidershipamongcorridorsseguesnicelyto
thenextchapter.ChapterSixspecificallyexaminestheinfluencesofR+P,and
notablyprojectsbuiltaccordingtoTODprinciples,onridershipinadditionto
housingprices.

ThemeanIn&OutBalanceindicescomputedamongR+PstationsfortheP.M.
Peakwere:0.75forearlyMTRlines;0.64fortheTKOline;and0.76fortheTung
Chungline.AsdiscussedinChapterThree,theIn&OutBalanceIndex=
1

| In Out |
whereInequalsstationentriesandOutequalsstationexits.The
In + Out

indexrangesfrom0to1,with0indicatingmaximumskewness(i.e.,onlyentriesor
exits)and1denotingmaximumbalance(comparablecountsofentriesandexits).

79

80

ChapterSix

R+PandTOD:
InfluencesonRidershipandHousingPrices

6.1

AnalyticalChallenges

IfR+Pprojectsyieldbenefits,theyshouldbereflectedbygainsinbothridership
andrealestateprices.Becauseofhighqualitydesigns,goodintermodal
connectivity,andefficientonandoffsitecirculation,onewouldexpecta
bumpinridershipatR+Pstationsrelativetoothers.Ridershipgainsare
primarilypublicbenefitstothedegreetheyreducetrafficcongestion,airpollution,
andenergyconsumption.AndaslongasR+Pprojectsaredesirableplacesto
live,work,andrunabusiness,propertypriceswillriseaspeopleandinstitutions
competeforlimitedsuppliesoffloorspace.Rentpremiumsreflectprivatebenefits
owingtothedemandforhighqualitydevelopmentandaccessiblelocationsina
denseurbansettinglikeHongKong.

ThischapterexaminestheassociationbetweenR+Pandridershipaswellas
housingprices.Multipleregressionequationsareestimatedtogaugethe
marginalcontributionsofR+Pontheseoutcomesholdingtheinfluencesofother
explanatoryfactorsconstant.Asdiscussedinthepreviouschapters,R+Pprojects
varyconsiderablyintheirdesignsandlandusecompositions.Thosebuilt
accordingtoTODprinciplesaregenerallybetterqualityprojects.Thusthe
analysesthatfollowalsodistinguishwhetherR+Pprojectsaretransitoriented
inpredictingridershipandhousingprices.

Methodologically,thechallengeingaugingthepayoffofR+PbyitselfandR+P
asTODisattributionhowmuchofthevariationinridershipandproperty
valuesisduetoprojectdesignversusallother(potentiallyconfounding)factors.
Itis,ofcourse,virtuallyimpossibletoproveR+Pand/orTODcausedridership
orhousingpricestoriseinthesenseofrulingoutallotherpossibleexplainers.
Thebestonecandoistobringinasmanyotherexplanatoryvariablesaspossible
that,assuggestedbytheory,influenceridershipandprices.Theeffortis
complicatedbythefactthatdefiningwhatconstitutesTODisinherently
subjective.Inourcase,wereliedonqualitativecasestudies,presentedinthe
priorchapter,toexamineMTRCsexperienceswithTOD.Accordingly,weused
qualitative(01coded)dummyvariablestodesignatewhetherastationwas
TODornot.Thisisanimperfectwaytocapturedesirableattributeslike

81

buildingintegration,efficientcirculation,andpublicamenities,howevergiven
datalimitations,therewaslittlechoicebuttousedummyvariables.Regardless,
wefeelthefindingsthatfollowshouldbeweighedlessintermsofthe
magnitudeofimpactsandmorewithregardtodirectioni.e.,arethesignson
theR+PandTODdummyvariablespositive?Theanalysesaremore
exploratorythandefinitiveandhopefullywillspurfollowupworkthattakes
advantageofnewandimproveddataasMTRCsR+Pprogramcontinuesto
mature.

6.2R+P,TOD,andRidership

InordertostudytheinfluencesofR+PandTODdesignsonridership,adatabase
wasconstructedusingeachofMTRs51stationsasanobservation.Theuseof
stationobservationsandmultipleregressiontopredictridershipasafunctionof
stationareaandregionalattributeshasbeencalleddirectridershipmodeling
(Cervero,2006).Besidesmanyofthebuiltenvironmentvariablespresentedin
ChapterThree(e.g.,GFAbylanduseandresidentialdensities),datawere
compiledonoperationalvariablesthoughttoinfluenceridership,likenumberof
feederbuslinesconnectingtoastationandcatchmentsize(basedonaveragerail
distancetothenearesttwostations).1Ridershipdatawerecompiledfor2005.
Whilemostothervariableswerealsoasof2005,variableslikeresidential
densities(e.g.,householdswithin500metersofstations)camefromHongKongs
2001census.

Theanalysisproceededasfollows.First,abasemodelisusedtopredict
averagedailyridershipbothforfivedayweekdaysandtwodayweekendsas
afunctionofstationarea,busandrailconnectivity,andlocationattributes.2
Next,anR+Pmodelispresentedthatsupplementsthebasemodelswitha

Whileservicequalityvariablesnormallyareincludedindirectmodelstopredict
ridership,inthecaseofMTR,trainheadwaysarecomparablyshortacrossmoststations,
thusthisvariablewasomittedfromtheanalysis.
2Themodelingwasinfluencedbyearlierworkontheeffectsofstationarea
developmentonMTRridershipbyTangetal.(2004).Theirstudyconcludedthatland
usecharacteristicsassociatedwithhighMTRpatronagewere:(1)denseurbancentersin
theoldestdistrictsofKowloonandHongKongisland;(2)majorintermodaltransfer
stations(includingconnectionsbetweenMTRandKCR);(3)anorientationtowardoffice
employment;and(4)compact,mixedusesettingswithvibrantstreetlife.Incontrast,
lowridershipstationstendedtobefartherfromthecore,hadasingledominantland
use,andexhibitedrelativelylowdensities.
1

82

dummyvariabledenotingwhetherastationobservationhasanR+Pprojector
not.Togetattheinfluenceofurbandesign,aTODmodelisnextpresented
thatfurtherdistinguisheswhethertheR+Pprojectembodiestransitoriented
designs(mostnotably,mixedusesandhighqualitypedestrianenvironments).
Thisisfollowedbytwofurthermodelrefinements:onethatdistinguishesR+P
stationswithTODdesignsbytype(e.g.,midriseresidential,largescalemixed
use)andonethatexamineswhetherthereareinteractiveeffectsbetweenTOD
andresidentialdensityi.e.,doesthecombinationofhighrisehousing
developmentandTODproduceproportionatelyanevengreaterbumpin
patronage?Inallofthesecases,ouraimistoexaminewhetherbringinginthe
dummyvariablesormakingmodelrefinementsaddsmarginalexplanatory
power,holdingvariablesinthebasemodelconstant.

BaseRidershipModel

Thebasemodel,presentedinTable6.1,showsthatin2005,MTRsaveragedaily
(24hour)ridershiprosewithresidentialdensitiesbothforweekdaysand
weekenddays.3Eachadditionalhouseholdwithin500metersofastationadded
1.75tripsperweekdayand1.83tripsperweekendday,allelsebeingequal.4
Havingamallandothercommercialactivitiesatastation,moreover,yielded
appreciablegainsinridership.LocationontheMTRnetworkalsomattered.
Ridershipwashigheratstationsthatwererelativelyfarawayfromotherstations
(i.e.,hadlargecatchments)anddeclinedwithdistancefromtheCentralStation.
BecauseofitsnewnessandtherelativesparsenessofdevelopmentonHong
Kongswestside,beingontheTungChunglineloweredridership(comparedto
otherrailcorriodor).Serviceconnectivityalsomattered.MTRspatronage
tendedtobehigheratstationswithtransferconnectionstoKCRandgoodfeeder
busservices.

UsingdailystatisticsprovidedbyMTRCforall365daysin2005,thedependent
variableswereexpressedasaverageweekday(averagedoverthefiveweekdaysfor
the52weeksoftheyear)andweekendday(averagedoverSaturdayandSundayforthe
52weeksoftheyear).
4Thisestimateislowerthanthe1.97additionalstationentriesperpublicorprivate
housingunitwithin500metersofastationfoundbyTangetal.(2004).Thedifference
couldbeduetoseveralfactors:theirmodelused2001(insteadof2005)data,wasbased
on19(versus51stations),andexcludedsubsidizedunits.
3

83

Table6.1.BaseRidershipModels.PredictionofAverageDailyRidershipin
2005forWeekdaysandWeekendDays,N=51

WeekdayModel1
WeekendDayModel1

Coeff.
PValue
Coeff.
PValue
Density:HHsw/in500m
1.75
.003
1.83
.004
CommercialStation(01)
68,428
.000
50,776
.000
CatchmentSize:avg.dis.
1,007
.000
898
.049
tonearest2stations
TimefromCenter:Travel
2,493
.008
1,819
.059
timefromCentralStation
TungChungLine(01)
62,189
.004
52,373
.019
KCRTransferSta.(01)
69,793
.001
69,238
.001
MFeederBusLines:No.
8254
.001
6,840
.007
64,916
.766
43,548
.024
Constant
RSquare
.719
.601

R+PRidershipModel

DenotingwhetheranMTRstationhadaR+Pprojectusingadummyvariable
failedtoimprovethebasemodelspredictivepowers,asshowninTable6.2.
Surprisingly,notonlywasthisdummyvariablestatisticallyinsignificantbutit
alsohadanegativesign.Whilenotalotcanbeinferredfromthisresultdueto
highstatisticalinsignificance,clearlyR+P,byitself,hashadlittleinfluenceon
MTRpatronage.Ofcourse,asaninstrumentforfinancingrailwayinvestments,
thegenerationofrailtrafficwasneveritsprimaryintent.Regardless,thereis
nothinggenericaboutR+Pthatincreasesridership,whetheronweekdaysor
weekends.

84


Table6.2.R+PRidershipModels.MarginalInfluencesofR+PonAverageDaily
Ridershipin2005forWeekdaysandWeekendDays:N=51

WeekdayModel2
WeekendDayModel2

Coeff.
PValue
Coeff.
PValue
Density:HHsw/in500m
1.77
.004
1.88
.004
CommercialStation(01)
68,443
.000
50,803
.001
CatchmentSize:avg.dis.
1,009
.000
902
.050
tonearest2stations
TimefromCenter:Travel
2,546
.008
1,909
.055
timefromCentralStation
TungChungLine(01)
60,760
.006
49,951
.030
KCRTransferSta.(01)
67,913
.002
66,104
.003
MFeederBusLines:No.
8,477
.001
7,217
.007
R+PStation(01)
3,443
.766
5,8312
.633
66,664
.001
46,507
.024
Constant
RSquare
.720
.603

TODRidershipModel

DoesdesigninganR+PprojectwithTODelementssuchasatHangHau,Tung
Chung,andHongKongstationsalsohaveaninsignificantorevennegative
effectonridership?Tothecontrary,wewouldexpecthighqualitydesignsand
attractiveamenitiestopositivelyinfluenceridershipandthiswasindeedborne
out,asshowninTable6.3.Controllingforfactorslikedensity,location,and
intermodalconnectivity,theresultssuggestR+PprojectsthatembodyTOD
designshavepositiveandappreciableimpactsonridership.5Thisheldforboth
weekdaysandweekends.ThuswhileR+Pasagenericproductisnotassociated
withridership,R+PasTODclearlyis.

Thisridershipbonusisnodoubtduetofactorsinadditiontotransitorienteddesign.It
islikelythatotherattributesofstationsthatweredummycodedasTODalsoaccount
forridershipbonus.Theseresultsshouldthusbeinterpretedassuggestiveofa
ridershippremiumandnotaspreciseestimates.
5

85

Table6.3.TODRidershipModels.MarginalInfluencesofR+PwithTOD
DesignsonAverageDailyRidershipin2005forWeekdaysandWeekendDays,
N=51

WeekdayModel3
WeekendDayModel3

Coeff.
PValue
Coeff.
PValue
Density:HHsw/in500m
1.88
.002
1.97
.002
CommercialStation(01)
68,131
.000
50,469
.000
CatchmentSize:avg.dis.
1,151
.000
1,046
.023
tonearest2stations
TimefromCenter:Travel
2,711.1
.003
2,044
.033
timefromCentralStation
TungChungLine(01)
89,940
.000
80,991
.004
KCRTransferSta.(01)
78,413
.002
78,159
.000
MFeederBusLines:No.
8,173
.001
6,756
.007
TODR+PStation(01)
35,853
.080
36,975
.088
62,473
.001
41,027
.030
Constant
RSquare
.739
.628

TODTypeRidershipModel

Tofurtherrefinetheanalysis,R+PstationsdummycodedasTODwerefurther
distinguishedbytype,definedinChapterThree.Table6.4revealsthatlarge
scaleresidentialTODprojects,suchasTungChung,wereassociatedwiththe
biggestridershipgains,followedbytwoothertypes:midriseresidentialand
largescalemixeduse.Relationshipswerestatisticallyweakerfortheselatter
twogroups.WhilestationsontheTungChunglinetendedtoaverage
substantiallylowerweekdayandweekendridershipthanotherstations,
controllingforotherfactors,inthecaseofTungChungstation,thislower
ridershipwasappreciablyoffsetbythebenefitsconferredbyTODdesign.

86

Table6.4.TODInfluencesbyR+PTypes.MarginalInfluencesofTODDesigns
byThreeR+PTypesonAverageDailyRidershipin2005forWeekdaysand
WeekendDays,N=51

WeekdayModel4
WeekendDayModel4

Coeff.
PValue
Coeff.
PValue
Density:HHsw/in500m
1.83
.003
1.97
.003
CommercialStation(01)
68,089
.000
49,848
.001
CatchmentSize:avg.dis.
1,066
.000
1,044
.046
tonearest2stations
TimefromCenter:Travel
2,734
.030
2,081
.034
timefromCentralStation
TungChungLine(01)
92,768
.005
87,810
.011
KCRTransferSta.(01)
79,288
.000
79,855
.001
MFeederBusLines:No.
8,519
.001
7,050
.006
TODMidRise
29,589
.194
30,510
.209
ResidentialR+P(01)
TODLargeScale
62,761
.072
58,096
.116
ResidentialR+P(01)
TODLargeScaleMixed
29,777
.454
41,945
.324
UseR+P(01)
64,555
.001
41,609
.035
Constant
RSquare
.746
.633

TODDensityInteractionRidershipModel

AfinalrefinementintroducedinvolvedinteractingtheTODdummyvariable
andtheresidentialdensityvariable.Theresults,showninTable6.5,suggestthat
R+PprojectswithTODdesignsindenseresidentialsettingsgetaproportional
bumpinridership.Indeed,themodelindicatesthataveragedovertheweek,the
additionofonehouseholdwithin500metersofanMTRstationadds1.64trips
perday.IfthestationhasanR+PprojectwithaTODdesign,eachnew
householdadds2.84dailyrailtrips(i.e.,1.64+1.20).Thereareclearlysynergies
atwork:(R+P)+(TOD)+(Density)=RidershipBonus.

87

Table6.5.InteractionofTODDensityModel.MarginalInfluencesofTOD
DesignsinHigherDensitySettingsonDailyRidershipAveragedOver7Day
Weeks:2005Data,N=51

WeeklyModel

Coeff.
PValue

Density:HHsw/in500m
1.64
.006

CommercialStation(01)
68,832
.000

CatchmentSize:avg.dis.
1,015
.020

tonearest2stations

TimefromCenter:Travel
2,561
.006

timefromCentralStation

TungChungLine(01)
69,968
.002

KCRTransferSta.(01)
71,110
.001

MFeederBusLines:No.
8,189
.000

Density&TOD
1.203
.256

Interaction(01)

66,969
.001
Constant

RSquare
.728

6.3R+P,TOD,andHousingPrices

ToexaminetheinfluencesofR+P,TOD,andotherfactorsonresidentialhousing
prices,threeMTRstationswithR+Pprojectswereselectedforcaseanalyses.6
ThethreecasesTinHau,HangHau,andTsingYicapturedifferentphasesof
R+Pdevelopment.AsshowninFigure6.1,TinHauliesonMTRsoriginal
UrbanLineonHongKongisland.ItthusrepresentsMTRCsearlygenerationof
R+Pprojectsincontrasttotheothertwocases.SituatedontheTKOLine,Hang
Haustationwasbuiltintheearly2000sinconcertwithamajorredevelopment
campaignonHongKongseastside.Andmodern,mixeduseTsingYistation,a
midwaystopontheAirportExpressLine,openedinthelate1990s.

Initially,workwascarriedoutonmodelingtheinfluencesofR+Ponofficeand
commercialretailrents.However,insufficientnumberofobservationsonrental
transactionspromptedustofocusonresidentialhousinginstead.
6

88

Residential
Use

GFA=8.37ha

Airport Line
Tsing Yi
GFA
=14.22ha

Site Area=1.80ha

Site Area=0.58ha

72.9% of GFA

Plot Ratio=5.42

TKO Line
Hang Hau
Plot Ratio=7.90

Urban Line
Tin Hau
Plot Ratio=14.43

Station
R+P Project

GFA =29.28ha
Site Area=5.4ha

Catchments
Transaction
Sampling

< 200m

< 400m

N=305

N=300

97.5% of GFA
< 400m and >400m
N=300

All Available Data

60 from R+Ps
245 from Non R+Ps

Expected
Outcome

-R+P Premium
-R+P Impact <200m

Random Sample
100 from R+Ps
100 from TOD
100 from Non R+Ps
-R+P Premium
-TOD Premium <400m

Random Sample
100 from R+Ps
100 from Non R+Ps <400m
100 from Non R+Ps >400m
-R+P Premium
-TOD Premium to >400m

83.9% of GFA

Figure6.1.MTRStationCasesforStudyingHousingPriceImpacts.R+PProject
Characteristics,CatchmentSizes,TransactionSampling,ExpectedOutcome

Figure6.1comparesthethreecasesettingsintermsofR+Pprojectcharacteristics,
catchmentsizes,salestransactionsampling,andexpectedinfluencesofR+Pand
TODonhousingprices.Allhousingsalestransactionsoccurredin2005.
Proprietarysalesdataforprivatehousingwereobtainedfromarealestate
brokeragecompany,EPRCLtd.7Samplesofaround300housingsales
transactionsweregeneratedforeachofthethreecases.
See:http://www.erpc.com.hk.Onlyprivatehousingsaleswerestudied.Publicand
subsidizedhousingwerenot.

89

Intheanalysesthatfollow,twoapproachesareusedtoinferpossibleprice
premiumsattributabletoR+PandTOD:(1)matchedpaircomparisons;and(2)
hedonicpricemodels.Withmatchedpairs,privateresidencesthatweresold
withinthesamestationcatchmentaredividedintotwoormoregroups(e.g.,
unitsinR+Pprojectsversusthosethatarenot).Meansalespricespersquarefoot
werecomputedandcompared.Theratioofdifferenceswereassumedto
representrentpremiums(e.g.,attributabletobeingR+P).Matchedpair
comparisonsinvoketheceterisparibusassumption,whichofcourseisnever
exactlytrueallhousingunitsvaryinwaysotherthansomebeingR+Pprojects
andothersnot.Factorslikemountainviews,buildingquality,andsiteamenities
areassumedtobeequivalentforthecomparisongroups.Thefactthatunitsare
withinthesamecatchmentandallareprivate(versuspublicorsubsidizedunits),
however,meanstheyarefairlycomparableinmanyrespects.

Incontrasttothematchedpairapproach,hedonicpricemodelinginvolvesusing
amultipleregressionmodeltoexplicitlyaccountfortheinfluenceofspecific
factors,likebuildingageandfloorleveloftheunit,onhousingprices.Hedonic
pricetheoryassumesthatmostconsumergoodscompriseabundleofattributes
andthatthetransactionpricecanbedecomposedintothecomponent(or
hedonic)pricesofeachattribute(Rosen,1974).Similartotheridershipmodels,
dummyvariablesareincludedinhedonicmodelstoindicatewhetherahousing
unitispartofanR+PdevelopmentandiftheprojecthasaTODdesign.Price
premiumsareinferredbytakingtheratioofthehedoniccoefficientontheR+Por
TODdummyvariablerelativetotheaveragesalespricepersquarefootforall
sampledunits.

TinHauCase

Becauseofhighurbandensitiesandclosestationspacing,thewalking
catchmentsofstationsalongMTRsUrbanLinetendtobefairlyrestrictedinsize.
InthecaseofTinHau,mosthousingbuiltinconjunctionwithinthestationlies
within200metersofthefaregateentrance.Figure6.2showsthetworesidential
complexes(calledParkTower)builtaspartofTinHausR+Pprojectlie
immediatelywestofthestation.NonR+Phousingliesfartherawaybutstill
withintheeasilywalkable200metercatchment.

ResultsfromthematchedpaircomparisonofprivatehousingatTinHauR+P
versusNonR+ParepresentedinTable6.2.Whilethetwohousingtypesare
notexactlyequivalent(e.g.,nonR+Phousingtendstobeolderandthebuildings
arenotastall),theynonethelesssharethemaincharacteristicoflyingnearthe
90

TinHaustation.Comparingthemeanhousingpricespersquarefoot,onecan
inferthatunitsatParkTowersellfora79%premium($8,465/$4,723).Beingnext
tothestationandpartofanR+Pproject,webelieve,accountformuchofthis
valueadded.Thesemeandifferencesarestatisticallysignificant.8

ThesecondanalysisofTinHaushousingmarket,basedonthehedonicprice
model,isshowninTable6.7.Incontrasttothesimplermatchedpair
comparison,thehedonicmodelspecificallycontrolsforfactorsthatexplain
housingprice,likeabuildingsage,distancefromMTRstation,andamenities
(e.g.,park)andthesoldunitsfloorwithinthebuildingandsize.9Themodel
revealsthatin2005,housingpricesforunitssoldwithin200metersoftheMTR
stationfellwithbuildingageandincreasedwithfloorlevel,unitsize,and
distancefromstation(whichlikelyreflectsthebenefitoflyingabufferdistance
fromthestationbutstillwithinaneasywalk).Havinganearbyparkandmain
roadalsoincreasedvalue.Andcontrollingforallofthesefactors,iftheunitwas
withintheParkTower(R+P)building,ittendedtosellforHK$1,331persquare
footmore.GiventhemeanvalueofsoldR+Punits,weinferthepremium
associatedwithR+PhousingatTinHauis15.7%(HK$1,331/HK$8,465).Thisis
considerablybelowthatestimatedusingthematchedpairresultsand,wefeel,
likelymorerepresentativeofthetruepremiumbecauseoftheimprovedmodel
specification.

Thetstatisticsweregeneratedusingdifferenceofmeanstests,assumingseparate
variancesforthetwogroups.
9Eventhoughthedependentvariable,housingsalesprice,controlsforsquarefootageof
theunit,theinclusionofunitsizeasanexplanatoryvariableallowsthemarginal
influencesofscaleonpricestobecaptured.
8

91

R=200m

R=150m
R=100m
R=50m

R+P Area
R+P Residential
Commercial
Residential
Hotel
Public etc
Others
Green Space

* 305 transaction cases in 2005

Figure6.2.TinHauStationandBuildingswithin200MeterCatchment

Table6.6.MatchedPairResultsforTinHauCase.ComparisonofBuilding
CharacteristicsandMeanHousingPricesperSquareFootforR+PandNonR+P
ResidentialDevelopmentwithin200MetersofStation,2005

R+P
NonR+P

(<200mofstation)
ParkTower
Agein2005(years)
Bldg.Floors
NetArea(sq.ft.)
Mean
Range
HousingPricepersq.ft.
(HK$)
Mean
Range
Std.Deviation
tstatistic(prob.)
No.ofSampledSales
Transactions

16
10to45

1,020
923to1,857

2to27
1to33

646
291to1,492

8,465
3,571to13,843
1,997

4,722
670to4,723
2,140
12.83(.000)

60

92

245

Table6.7.HedonicPriceModelResultsforTinHauCase.MarginalInfluences
ofR+PResidentialDevelopmentonHousingPricesperSquareFootforHousing
within200MetersofStation,2005

Coeff.
tStatistic PValue
Agein2005(Years)
105.4
8.67
.000
FloorofBuilding
33.5
3.32
.001
UnitSize(netareainsquarefeet)
2.06
5.15
.000
DistancetoMTRStation:meters
12.57
4.68
.000
Park:GreenSpaceorParkatornextto
1213.7
3.93
.000
soldunitsbuilding(01)
MainRoad:TrunkRoadnexttosold
1078.4
4.15
.000
unitsbuilding(01)
R+PProject(01)
1330.8
2.04
.043
3203.4
4.13
.000
Constant
RSquare
.697

HangHauCase

AspartofthemassiveredevelopmentunderwayalongMTRsTKOLine,the
HangHaustationhaswitnessedasizeableamountofresidentialdevelopment
overthepastdecadesomethroughR+Pthoughmostnot.AsFigure6.3
reveals,theR+Phousing,calledResidentialOasis,consistsofsixtowersadjacent
tothestationsituatedaboveamall.Between100and300metersofthestation
lies20towersofprivatehousingthatpredateResidentialOasis.Becausethese
buildingsarelikewisesurroundedbyretailshopsandalsoenjoydirect
connectionstotheHangHaustation(viaskybridges),theseunitsembodymany
featuresofTOD.Inouranalysis,wethusrefertothemasNonR+PTOD.The
thirdtypeofhousingatHangHautendstobeolderandfartherfromthestation,
hasnoadjacentretail,anddoesnotdirectlyconnecttothestationviaskybridges.
WereferredtotheseunitsasNonR+P/NonTOD.

Table6.8comparesattributesof100randomlysampledhousingunitsamongthe
threegroupsthatliewithin500metersoftheHangHaustation.Building
heightsareseentotaperwithdistancefromthestationandaverageunitsizes
amongthethreegroupsarefairlysimilar.

93

N
R=400m

R=200m

Station
R+P Commercial
R+P Residential
Commercial
Residential
Public etc
Others
Green Space
*Random 300 Residential transaction cases

Figure6.3.HangHauStationandBuildingswithin500MeterCatchment

Table6.8alsoshowsthematchedpairresultsonmeanhousingprices.
ComparedtoTODhousingnotbuiltthroughR+P,theR+Punitsenjoyedan
averagepremiumof26%($5,395/$4,277).ComparedtoprivatenonTOD
housing,R+Punitssold,onaverage,formorethantwiceasmuchpersquarefoot
HK$5,395versusHK$2,559.Differencesarestatisticallysignificant.

Inestimatingthehedonicpricemodelforthe300sampledprivateunitssoldnear
theHangHaustationin2005,variablesmeasuringaunitsage,distanceto
station,andTODstatus(coded01)werefoundtobehighlyintercorrelated.10
ThisisbecausetheunitswithTODdesigns(i.e.,mixedlandusesanddirect
pedestrianconnectionstothestation)arerelativelynewandconcentratednear
theMTRstation.Forthisreason,threeseparatemultipleregressionequations
wererunforassessingtheinfluenceofR+Ponhousingprices,distinguishedby
whetherAge,DistancetoMTRStation,orTODwasusedasan
explanatorycontrolvariable.
10

Allcorrelationsamongthesethreevariableswereabove0.72inabsoluteterms.

94

Model1inTable6.9showsthat,whenusingAgeofunitasapredictor,R+P
providesamodestpremiumof5.7%(i.e.,$290.5/$5,395,thedenominatorbeing
theaveragepriceofsoldR+Punits).WithDistanceasapredictor,thetable
revealsevenahigherpremium:8.0%($430.3/$5,395).Theinfluenceofthe
DistancevariableinModel2isnegative,suggestingthatbeingnearahigh
amenitystationaddsvalue.Lastly,thethirdmodelinTable6.9indicatesa
sizablepremiumforthestatusofbeinganR+Pproject,howeverthisis
supplementedbyabonusassociatedwithbeingTOD.11Theestimatedpremium
forunitsinResidentialOasisrelativetononR+P/nonTODprojects,then,is
100%[i.e.,($939.1+$1,636.5)/$2,558.9,thedenominatorrepresentingtheaverage
pricefornonR+P/nonTODunits].RelativetootherTODunitsthatarenotR+P,
thepremiumis22%(i.e.,$939.1/$4,277.2,thedenominatorrepresentingthe
averagepricefornonR+PTODunits).Althoughbelowthepremiumspredicted
usingthematchedpairapproach,thepremiumsestimatedusinghedonicmodels
areconsiderablyhigherthanthoseestimatedfortheolderTinHauproject.

TsingYiCase

MTRsTsingYistation,ontheAirportExtensionline,isnotedforitsmodern
MaritimeSquareshoppingmallaswellastheexclusiveTierraVerde
condominiumcomplexthatarcsalongthewaterfront.Figure6.4showsa400
metercatchmentaroundtheTsingYistation,whichnotonlyencompassesthe
channelwaybutalsospansinstitutionaluses(e.g.,alargesportspark)and
considerableamountsofnonresidentialactivityincludingacommunitypark.
RelativetotheTierraVerdeR+Pcomplex(Photo6.1),onlytwootherhousing
projectsaretrulycomparableintermsofhousingqualityandprojectscaleand
thusarepotentialcandidatesformatchedpairs.OneVillaEsplanada,liestothe
northofTsingYiwithin400metersofthestation.Theother,GreenfieldGarden,
liestothesouth,beyondthe400meterring.Thematchedpairanalysis,thus,is
basedonresidentialpackagesofcomparablescaleandqualitywithinthevicinity
ofTsingYistation.

Statistically,theR+PdummydenoteswhetherahousingunitispartoftheResidential
OasisR+Pproject.TheTODdummyindicateswhethertheunitliesinabuildingina
TODsetting(i.e.,mixedusesandconnectedtothestationeitherdirectlyorvia
skybridges).The200sampledTODunitsincludethosethatareR+PandnonR+P.
Thus,allR+Punitsarescored1fortheR+PandTODdummieshowevernonR+PTOD
unitsreceivea1valueonlyfortheTODdummyvariable.
11

95

Table6.8.MatchedPairResultsforHangHauCase.ComparisonofBuilding
CharacteristicsandMeanHousingPricesperSquareFootforR+P,NonR+PTOD,and
NonR+P/NonTODResidentialDevelopmentwithin500MetersofStation,2005

Agein2005(years)
Bldg.Floors
NetArea(sq.meters)
Mean
Range

R+P
Residential
Oasis

NonR+P
TOD

NonR+P/
NonTOD

1
5to59

593
494to956

6to8
1to47

510
380to817

6to15
1to39

517
213to651

HousingPriceper

sq.ft.(HK$)
Mean
5,395
4,277
2,559
Range
3,744to7,076
3,227to5,217
1,658to3,117
Std.Deviation
609
324
381
tstatistic(prob.)

2.261(.012)*
7.536(.000)**
No.ofSampled

SalesTransactions
100
100
100
*DifferenceofMeanststatisticbetweenR+PandNonR+PTOD;onetailedtest
**DifferenceofMeanststatisticbetweenR+PandNonR+P/NonTOD;one
tailedtest

96

Table6.9.HedonicPriceModelResultsforHangHauCase.MarginalInfluencesofR+PResidentialDevelopmenton
HousingPricesperSquareFootforHousingwithin500MetersofStation;ThreeModelsBasedonControlVariables,2005

FloorofBuilding
UnitSize(netareainsquarefeet)
Agein2005(Years)
DistancetoMTRStation:meters
TOD(01)
R+PProject(01)
Constant
RSquare

Model1
(withAge
Variable)
Coeff.
PValue
20.5
.000
0.97
.000
179.2
.000

290.5
.048
4085.4
.000
.745

97

Model2
(withDistance
Variable)
Coeff.
PValue
19.0
.001
0.561
.096

4.99
.000

430.3
.006
4052
.000
.719

Model3
(withTOD
Variable)
Coeff.
PValue
13.5
.000
1.00
.000

1636.5
.000
939.1
.000
3203.4
.000
.899

Figure6.4andPhoto6.1.TsingYiStationAreaandThree
ComparisonHousingComplexes(Left);TierraVerde
AboveMaritimeSquareatTsingYiStation(Right)

Acomparisonofthethreeresidentialcomplexesin2005(Table6.10)showsthat
whileTierraVerdeandVillaEsplanadaarequitecomparable,GreenfieldGarden
isnotonlyfartherfromthestation,butunitsarealsoolderandsmaller(andthus
lessmodern).AlthoughthevalidityofpricecomparisonsbetweenTierraVerde
andGreenfieldGardenisquestionable,thehedonicpricemodelsthatfollow
controlforthesefactorsbyexplicitlyincludingthemintheequation.As
expected,thepairedcomparisonsofmeanrentsinTable6.10revealbig
differencesbetweenTierraVerdeandGreenfieldGarden(a68.9%differential)
andinconsequentialonesbetweenTierraVerdeandVillaExplanada.

98

Table6.10.MatchedPairResultsforTsingYiCase.Comparison
ofBuildingCharacteristicsandMeanHousingPricesperSquareFoot
forThreeComparisonProjects,2005

Agein2005(years)
Bldg.Floors
NetArea(sq.meters)
Mean
Range

R+PTOD
TierraVerde

NonR+P(<400m)
VillaEsplanada

NonR+P(>400m)
GreenfieldGarden

6
8to52

643
435to796

4
1to45

664
508to859

16
2to39

424
379to513

HousingPriceper

sq.ft.(HK$)
Mean
5,648
5,406
3,344
Range
3,046to7,035
3,021to6,579
2,078to4,154
Std.Deviation
569
564
352
tstatistic(prob.)

0.512(.305)*
33.286(.000)**
No.ofSampled

SalesTransactions
100
100
100

*DifferenceofMeanststatisticbetweenTierraVerdeandVillaEsplanada;onetailed
test
**DifferenceofMeanststatisticbetweenTierraVerdeandGreenfieldGarden;one
tailedtest

ThehedonicpricemodelshowninTable6.11revealsthatunitsintheTierra
VerdeR+Penjoyedasignificantrentpremiumoverthoseintheothertwo
developments,controllingforaunitsage,floorlevelwithinabuilding,andsize.
The4.7%pricedifferentialwasduemainlytodifferencesbetweenTierraVerde
andGreenfieldGardencases.12AsecondmodelinTable6.11denotesunitsin
bothTierraVerdeandVillaEsplanadaasTODs(basedontheirmixeduse
surroundingsandattractivepedestrianamenities).Here,thepremium
associatedwithTODdesignisevengreater:34.2%.13

ThisdifferentialequalstheratioofHK$263.1totheaveragepriceforR+Punits(i.e.,
TierraVerdeunits)ofHK$5,647.7.
13ThisdifferentialequalstheratioofHK$1,933.1totheaveragepriceforTODunits(i.e.,
TierraVerdeandVillaEsplanada)ofHK$5,647.7.
12

99

Table6.11.HedonicPriceModelResultsforTsingYiCase.
MarginalInfluencesofR+PandTODResidentialDevelopment
onHousingPricesperSquareFoot,2005

Model1
R+PModel
Coeff.
PValue
-163.88
.000
16.27
.000
1.01
.000
263.1
.000

5230.5
.000
.856

Model2
TODModel
Coeff.
PValue

15.71
.000
1.04
.001

1933.1
.000
2609.5
.000
.855

Agein2005(Years)
FloorofBuilding
UnitSize(netareainsquarefeet)
R+PProject(01)
TOD(01)
Constant
RSquare

SummaryonPriceEffects

TheanalysesunearthedevidencethatR+Pyieldssignificantpremiumsrelativeto
fairlycomparablenonR+Phousingprojects.Alsoimportantistransitoriented
designs.Table6.12,whichsummarizestheresults,revealsfairlysubstantial
premiumsassociatedwithbothR+PandTODbasedonmatchedpairresults.
ThesepremiumestimatesweresubstantiallyhigherthanthepremiumsofHK$98
toHK$280persquarefoot(overthe1994to2004period)foundbyTangetal.
(2004).Wenotethatinouranalyses,notallofthepairswereideallycomparable,
whichcouldaccountfordifferencesbetweenthetwostudies.Also,thepremium
estimatesfromourhedonicpriceresults,whichexplicitlycontrolledforpotential
confoundersintheanalyses,arenotashighasthematchedpairresultsbutlikely
betterreflecttruepricepremiums.Similartotheridershipmodelfindings,
benefitsassociatedwithR+Pweregreatestfornewergenerationprojects,as
reflectedbyexperiencesattheHangHauandTsingYistations.Andthereare
hintsthatthecombinationofR+Pandtransitorienteddesignsproduces
synergisticeffectsproportionallyhigherrentsinadditiontoridershipbonuses.

100

Table6.12.SummaryofHousingPriceEffectsAssociatedwithR+PandTOD

Station

Urban Line
Tin Hau

TKO Line
Hang Hau

Airport Line
Tsing Yi

SalesPrice

Means(HK$)
R+P
8,465
5,395
5,648
TOD

4,277
5,606
NonR+P
4,722

NonTOD

2,589
3,343
R+PPremium

fromMatched
Pairs(HK$)
TOD

$1,118(26.1%)
42(0.8%)
NonR+P
3,743(79.0%)

NonTOD

2,806(110.8%)
2,305(70.0%)
R+PPremium

290.5to939.1

fromHedonic
Models(HK$) 1,330.8(15.7%)
(5.3%to17.4%)
263.1(4.7%)
TODPremium

1,637(38.3%)
1,933(34.2%)
fromHedonic
Models(HK$)

ThepresenceofpricepremiumsatR+PprojectsandinTODsettingscouldbe
expectedtospurrealestatedeveloperstoredeveloplandforhighervalueuses.
Indeed,Tangetal.(2004)foundevidencethatthepresenceofMTRstations
encouragedpropertyredevelopment.Inreviewingapplicationsforcommercial
officeredevelopment,theyfoundmostplannedredevelopmentsiteswerewithin
400mofanMTRstation.Theyconcludeprivatelandownersanddevelopers
enjoyahaloeffectfromthepresenceofarailwaystation,promptingthemto
maximallyexploitthebenefitsconferredbydevelopingtheirlandholdingstothe
highestpotentialuse.Intheabsenceofcomprehensiveplanning,thesmall,
somewhatpiecemealapproachtoinsituredevelopmentdoesnotnecessarilyadd
uptoacohesivesetoflanddevelopments.However,whenmasterplanned
accordingtoTODprinciples,asreflectedbyprojectslikeHangHauandTsing
Yi,theevidencesuggeststhatlandpricepremiumsofredevelopmentcanbe
substantial.

101

References

Cervero,R.2006.AlternativeApproachestoModelingtheTravelDemand
ImpactsofSmartGrowth.JournaloftheAmericanPlanningAssociation,Vol.72,
No.3,2006,pp.285295.

Rosen,S.1974.HedonicPricesandImplicitMarkets:ProductDifferentiationin
PureCompetition.JournalofPoliticalEconomicsVol.,82pp.601630.

Tang,B.S.,Chiang,Y.H.,Baldwin,A.N.,andYeung,C.W.2004.Studyofthe
IntegratedRailPropertyDevelopmentModelinHongKong,TheHongKong
PolytechnicUniversity.

102

ChapterSeven

R+PinaRegionalContext

7.1VisioningHongKongsFuture

Railtransithasalwaysplayedacentralroleinadvancingvisionsoffuture
settlementandurbanizationpatternsforgreaterHongKong.Asreflectedina
seriesofterritorialdevelopmentstrategiesandlongrangelanduseand
transportationplansoverthepastseveraldecades,HongKongscivicleaders,
businesscommunity,andtownplannershavelongunderstoodandembraced
thesymbioticrelationshipbetweenrailtransitinvestmentsandcity
development.Couplingrailtransitandurbandevelopmenthasalsobeena
cornerstoneofeffortstopromotesustainablepatternsofurbanizationand
mobilityinafiscallyprudentmanner,asembodiedbytheR+Pprogramme.

HongKongfirstgrewalongitswaterfrontsandlateronharborreclamationsand
landfills.MTRsearlyraillinesweresitedinthesedense,builtuppartsofthe
citysince,afterall,thiswaswheretheriderswere.Asresidentialdevelopment
spreadoutwardsintotheNewTerritories,railinvestmentswereviewedasa
wayofformingabackbonethatchannelsregionalgrowth.Inmorerecent
years,railwayshavealsoservedascatalystsforredevelopment,includingthe
provisionofpublichousingonformerbrownfieldsites(e.g.,LokFuandWang
TaiSin).AsHongKongseconomicbasecontinuestoshiftfromtraditional
manufacturingtoaservicebasedeconomy,moreandmoreredevelopment
possibilitieswillavailthemselves.Economictransformationprovides
unprecedentedopportunitiesforrailwayinvestmentstorestructureHong
Kongsphysicallandscape,targetinggrowthtoinfillsitesandinsodoing,
preservingtheterritorysopenspaceandnaturalresources.Itisincreasingly
understoodthatthecoordinationandintegrationofrailtransitandurban
developmentnotonlyyieldsmobilitybenefitsbutalsoplacesgreaterHongKong
onasustainablepathway.

7.2

GuidedDecentralization

HongKonghasthreehierarchicallevelsofcomprehensiveplanning:atthe

103

highestlevel,theTerritorialDevelopmentStrategy1providesabroadland
use/transport/environmentalplanningframeworktoguidefuturedevelopment
andtheprovisionoffutureinfrastructureinHongKong;subregional
DevelopmentStrategies,whichprovideabridgebetweenterritorialandlocal
planningforfivesubregionsofHongKong,translatingregionalgoalsintomore
specificobjectives;andstatutoryplans,whichproposepermissiblelandusesand
majorroadsystemsforindividualdistricts,backedbyzoninganddevelopment
guidelines.2Attheterritorialandsubregionallevels,developmentstrategiesare
complementedbyatransportationcomponent.InthecaseoftheTerritorial
DevelopmentStrategy,RailwayDevelopmentStrategieshavebeenpreparedin
parallel,tobothserveandguidegrowth.In1991,acomprehensiveregional
plan,Metroplan,wasapprovedthatservedasaspatialreferentforterritorialand
subregionaldevelopmentstrategies,tyingpoliciestoplacesandcorridors.
Metroplanstressedtheimportanceofplanninganddevelopinglanduseand
transportinmutuallyreinforcingandselfsustainingways,asreflectedinthe
1991report:Themetropolitanareawillbeservedbyahighcapacity,multi
modaltransportsystemwithhighdensitydevelopmentconcentratedaround
majorinterchanges(Pryor,2006,p.60).Metroplangaveparticularfocusto
redesigningthecityaroundVictoriaHarbour,settingthestageforsomeof
MTRCsmostsuccessfulR+Pprojects,liketheIFCtoweratopHongKong
Station.3

Thetransportationelementsofcomprehensivedevelopmentstrategieshave
servedtoarticulaterailtransitsroleinthelanduse/transportnexus.The1994
RailwayDevelopmentStrategy,forexample,explicitlyembracedthebackbone
strategythroughanaggressiveexpansionofrailwayservices,includinglinesto
thenewinternationalairportandNewTerritories,aregionalexpresslinetothe
mainlandChinaborder,andcentralcityredevelopment(e.g.,TseungKwanO).4
Theplanassumedthat70%offuturepopulationand80%ofemployment
ThefirstTerritorialDevelopmentStrategywaspreparedin1981,followedbyupdates
in1986,1988,and1991.
2GuidingthepreparationoftheseplansistheHongKongPlanningStandardsand
Guidelines,settingstandardsforthescale,locationandsiterequirementsofvariousland
usesandfacilities.Itisusedinthepreparationoftownplans,planningbriefs,andthe
scrutinyofdevelopmentproposals.
3MetroplanwasendorsedbyHongKongsExecutiveCouncilin1991andwas
subsequentlycarriedforwardtodetailedplanningthroughthepreparationofaseriesof
DevelopmentStatementsfordistrictswithintheregion.
4HongKongGovernment,TransportBranch,RailwayDevelopmentStrategy,December
1994.
1

104

opportunitieswouldbewithinonemileofarailwaystation.Theplanalso
soughttoincreaserailtransitsshareofmotorizedtripsfrom31%to43%by
2016.

BorrowingachapterfromScandinavianplanningpractice,HongKongs
territorialplanshaveenvisagedfuturedevelopment(calledstrategicgrowth
areas)asstringsofpearls,markedbyahierarchyofurbancentersinterlaced
byhighquality,highcapacityrailtransitalongwelldefinedlinearaxes(Map
7.1,leftpanel).InareviewofMetroplansimpactonrailtransit,McCarthy(1996,
p.28)notedthattheplanisnotonlysustainablebutalsopotentially
remunerativeforMTRCsinceitlocateshighdensityzonesatrailheadsand
ensuresthatMTRcapturesahighpercentageoftripsmadefromthoseareas,
yieldinghighrevenue/financialreturnstoMTRC.TherightpanelofMap7.1
showsthatR+PprojectshaveindeedbeenresponsivetoMetroplan,contributing
totheconcentrationofdevelopmentindesignatedgrowthareas.Moreover,
accompanyingrailwaydevelopmentstrategieshavecalledforinvestmentinrail
linesinadvanceofdemandtoshapegrowth,againapracticelongpracticedin
sustainabletransitmetropoliseslikeStockholmandCopenhagen(Cervero,1998).
The1998TerritorialDevelopmentStrategy,forexample,notes:Asamatterof
principle,itisconsideredthatprovisionshould,wherepractical,bemadefor
newpassengerrailsystemsaheadoforatleastparallelwiththedevelopmentof
newstrategicgrowthareas.5HongKongsRailwayDevelopmentStrategiesof
1994and2000explicitlycalledforusingincrementsofpropertyvaluegainsto
financerailwayinvestmentsinadvanceofdevelopment,acornerstoneofMTRs
R+Pprogramme.Brownlee(2001)contendsR+Phasnotanticipatedbutrather
respondedtodevelopment,chargingthiswayofrailfinancinghasmeantit
makesfinancialsensetobuildaraillineonlywhentheoperatorcanbeassured
ofhighusage,whichhascauseddelayinbuildingrailtopopulationcenters
(p.4).MTRCsrecentrailwayinvestments,suchastheextensiontothenew
internationalairport,clearlyhavebeeninadvanceofmarketdemand,consistent
withrecommendationsofgovernmentsRailwayDevelopmentStrategies.

ThatMTRstationshaveleveragedlanddevelopmentandincreaseddensitiesis
indisputable.Meakin(1989)contendsthatMTRscityshapingcapabilities,
however,havebeenmutedbythepaucityofdevelopablesitesinMTRcorridors

Planning,EnvironmentandLandsBureau,GovernmentofHongKong

TerritorialDevelopmentStrategyReview:AResponsetoChangeandChallenges,1998.

105

Map7.1.TerritorialDevelopmentStrategies:LeftMetroplansProposedGrowthAreasformingStringsofPearls;
RightR+PProjectsContributetoStrategicGrowthAreas.Source(leftpanel):Planning,EnvironmentandLands
Bureau,TerritorialDevelopmentStrategyReview:AResponsetoChangeandChallenges, 1999.

106

andconstraintslikeairportrelatedheightrestrictionsinKowloon.Suchfactors,
however,havehadlesspresencealongtheMTRCsmostrecentextensionssuch
asthenewAirportLine.Andwithoutquestion,someofAsiastallest
skyscrapers,includingCentralPlazainWanChaiandIFCTowerattheHong
KongStation,couldnothavebeenbuiltwithouthighcapacitysubwayservices
nearby.Whilenotsufficienttoaccommodatehighrisecommercialdevelopment,
undergroundrailwayserviceshavewithoutquestionbeenaprerequisite.
RemarksRunnacles(2006,p.110):ItisnowacknowledgedthatHongKong
wouldbeunsustainablewithouttheMTR.

7.3 BalancedGrowth

Inadditiontogivingrisetoastringofpearlsbuiltform,railwayinvestments
havealsobeenturnedtoforachievingbalanceddevelopment.The1998
TerritorialDevelopmentStrategyspecificallycalledfordecentralizingofficegrowth
aroundnewrailservedemploymentnodesinordertoachieveabetterjobsto
populationbalance.Theaimwastoconvertlargelydormitorycommunitiesof
theNewTerritoriestobalanced,mixedusedistricts,interlinkedbyhighquality
railservices.Thestudynotedthatinadditiontocreatingselfcontainedurban
centersandshorteningthelengthoftrips,thebalanceofemploymentand
residencesalsocanleadtomoreefficientbidirectionaltravelflows.Aligning
densitiesofbothresidencesandemploymentsiteswithinwalkabledistancesof
railwaystationswasconsideredessentialtowardincreasingtransitsmarket
shareoftrips:Landuseplanninganddensitytargetsshouldbesetforhigh
densitydevelopmentareasthatproducesadistributionofpopulationand
employmentsuchthatsay60%ofbothdwellingsandworkplacesarewithin
walkincatchmentareas(ofapproximately500mradius)ofrailwaystations.6

Despitethebestofintentionstodecentralizeemploymentgrowth,todatemany
ofHongKongssatellitecentershaveyettoattractmajoremployersandbig
businesses.AttheTungChungstation,forexample,onlyaroundonequarterof
officespacewasoccupiedfouryearsfollowingthestationsopening.InHong
Kong,manyemployersandbusinessesperceivetremendouseconomic
advantagestolocatinginorneartraditionalurbancenters,weakeningthe
marketforoutlyingofficespace.Thisisallthemoresointodaysincreasingly
competitiveglobaleconomywhereinformationandservicebasedindustries
seektotapintothebenefitsofagglomerationeconomiese.g.,productivity
6

TerritorialDevelopmentStrategyReview,1998,pp.8283.

107

gainsassociatedwithclusteringhighlyskilled,specializedlabor.Accordingly,
railservednewtownshavefailedtoproducethebalanceddevelopment
projectedbyplanners(Leeds,2006).Infact,from1992to2002,selfcontainment
decreasedinurbanareasasreflectedbyincreasesincrossdistricttravel(Hong
KongTransportDepartment,2003)7.

7.4

TransitPrioritiesandPedestrianization

HongKongplannershavealsotiedthelinkageofpublictransportandlanduse
totraveldemandmanagement,particularlyoverthepasttenyears.Several
governmentreportsemphasizedtheimportanceoftendingtothemobilityand
safetyneedsofpedestrians,recognizingthatallrailusersarepedestrianstosome
degree.Travelavoidancewasalsostressedinpastplans.TheThird
ComprehensiveTransportStudy(CTS3)recommendsanintegratedapproach
takingintoaccountlanduseandenvironmentalplanninginordertominimize
theneedfortravel(p.2).CTS3similarlycallsforplacingfuturepopulation
andemploymentcentresinthevicinityofrailwaystationsservedbyintegrated
pedestriansystemsandothertransportfeederservicestomaximizetheusageof
railways.Itreinforcesatransitfirstapproach,givingthehighestpriorityto
railwayexpansionandformingthebackboneoftheregionstransport
network.

CTS3isnotableforgoingfurtherthananyofitspredecessorsinemphasizing
thevalueofhighqualitywalkingenvironments.Thereportsauthorswrite:
Pedestrianization,togetherwithgradeseparatedandsafepedestrianfacilities,
canhelpreducethenumberofshortmotorizedtrips,enhanceroadsafety,
increasemobilityandbenefittheenvironment(p.11).Furthermore,by
concentratingpopulationandemploymentaroundrailwaystations,relianceon
theprivatecarwillbereduced.Thereportfurthernotes:Theproportionof
tripsthatwillusearaillineisverymuchhigherwithinthewalkinzone,which
undernormalconditionsistypically400maroundeachstation.Itisfurther
pointedoutthatthiszonecanbeextendedconsiderablybyprovisionofgood
walkways,separatedfromtrafficnuisances.Servingpedestrians,moreover,
shouldnotbeanafterthought,accordingtothereport:Duringthedesignofa
railstation,orpublictransportinterchange,activeconsiderationshouldbegiven
toprovidinggoodpedestrianaccess.Thesearenotsimplyhighmindedideals.
ExceptionsincludeYuenLongandTinShuiWainewtowns,wheretheshareoftotal
tripsinternaltothenewtownsrosefrom13%in1992to23%in2002.
7

108

Statisticsbearthemout.Oneanalysisestimatedthatwalkingdistancefor
boardingandalightingexplains26%oftransitmodechoicedecisionsingreater
HongKong(HongKongTransportDepartment,2003).

7.5

RecentandEmergingRegionalPlans

Futureplansrecognizearegionintransitionreflectedbytheshiftfroma
traditionalmanufacturingeconomicbasetomoreaservice,informationoriented
economywithincreasinglystronginternationallinkages.Itsfutureeconomywill
bemorediverse,spanningbusiness,finance,information,tourism,entrepot
activitiesandmanufacturing.Economicrestructuringandglobalizationwill
withoutquestionplacegreaterdemandsonHongKongsinternationalairport
andseaportfacilitiesaswellasthesurfacetransportationfacilitiesthatserve
them.Deindustrializationalsocreatesnewdevelopmentopportunities.Hong
Kongsmostrecentplansrevealtheshiftfromexpandingrailfednewtownson
formergreendfieldstoredevelopingbrownfieldsitespreviouslyoccupiedby
factoriesanddecliningretaildistricts.HongKong2030:PlanningVisionand
Strategyidentifiedindustrialzonesthatcouldberecycledintolivable,mixeduse
communitiesservedbyhighcapacitytransit.Olderhousingstockwillalsobe
convertedintohigherqualitylivingenvironments.The2030planacknowledges
thatmanynewtownsareperceivedbymanyresidentsassufferingfrom
excessivelyhighdensities,creatingratheroppressiveenvironments.

HongKongs2030longrangeplanisnearingcompletionatthistime.Itcallsfor
abalanceofredevelopingdecliningurbandistrictsandnewtowndevelopment
inordertoaccommodatethe8.4millioninhabitantsand4millionemployees
projectedfor2030.8UrbanregenerationistotakeplacenotonlyinKowloonand
theNewTerritoriesbutalsoonsouthernHongKongIsland.Sofarasthedesign
offuturenewtowns/intown,TseungKwanO(TKO)islikelyabellwether
highstationareadensitiesmatchedbylowersurroundingdensitiescomparedto
previousgenerationnewtowns,withanemphasisonpublicamenities,
pedestrianization,naturallandscaping,andqualityofenvironment.The2030
planalsofocusesasmuchonneighborhoodscaleasregionalscaletransport:
Withinthetown,peopleshouldbeabletotravelinenvironmentallyfriendly
HongKongGovernmentDevelopmentBureau,HongKong2030:PlanningVisionand
Strategyadoptsalongertimehorizonthanpreviousstrategiesandawiderregional
perspective,weighingtheimplicationsofdifferentdevelopmentscenariosinthePearl
RiverDeltaregionofmainlandChina.
8

109

modesoftransportationsuchaselectrictrolleybuses,peoplemovers,and
travellatorsthatarewellconnectedtoconvenientlylocatedtransport
interchangesformasstransportationsystems.Thereshouldbemoreuseof
pedestrianzonesandwalkways.9

The2030planalsoreemphasizestheimportanceofjobshousingbalance,noting
thatastheproportionofthepopulationlivingintheNewTerritoriescontinues
toincrease,the78%shareofjobsintheMainUrbanArea(KowloonandHong
KongIsland)needstobelowered.Theplanrecognizes,however,thatwiththe
increasinglyserviceorientedeconomy,thetendencyoffirmstoagglomeratein
existingbusinessdistrictsishighandtherefore,thereislimitedopportunity
forrezoningemploymentlandintheMainUrbanAreawithoutarousingmany
objections.10

WhatrolewillR+PplayinHongKongsfutureevolution?Mostlikely,itwillbe
acrucialone.TheinherentadvantagesofR+Pasaneffectiveformofvalue
captureisinnowaydiminishedbyshiftsincommunitydesignandtown
planningpractice.Howeverthedesireofmanyresidentsforlowerbuilding
heightsandmoreneighborhoodscaleopenspaceandamenitiespresentsboth
challengesandopportunitiesintheexecutionofR+Pincomingyears.Thereare
obviouslyfinancialramificationstoloweringdensitiesaroundrailwaystations
sinceMTRsjointdevelopmentincomerisesproportionallywithplotratios.
Howeverhigherqualityurbandesignsthatappealtothetastespreferencesofthe
buyingpublicmeanspotentiallyhigherrentspersquaremeter.Theprevious
chapteruncoveredhousingpricepremiumsfromcouplingR+Pwithhighquality
urbandesigns.StrikinganappropriatebalancebetweenR+Pasarevenue
generationinstrumentandatoolforbuildingattractive,sustainablecommunities
aroundMTRstationswillbecriticaltowardtheprogrammecontributingtoboth
longrangeplanningvisionsandMTRCscorporateobjectives.

HongKong2030:PlanningVisionandStrategyalsoprovidesnewopportunitiesfor
R+PbyvirtueofitsemphasisonenhancinglinkagestomainlandChina.This
couldoccurintwoways.Oneisthroughcoordinatinggrowthandrailway
investmentsinthePearlRiverDeltaregion.Theotheristhroughprogrammatic
expansionofvaluecaptureprinciples,andpotentiallyR+Pasaspecific
9

Hong Kong Government Development Bureau, Hong Kong 2030: Planning Vision and
Strategy, Vision and Planning Objectives, Objective 3.21.
10
Hong Kong Government Development Bureau, Hong Kong 2030: Planning Vision and
Strategy, Stage 2 Public Consultation Digest.

110

application,toplannedrailwayimprovementsinthetwodozenormoreChina
citieswithmetropolitanrailsystemsonthegroundorintheadvancedplanning
stages.Suchpossibilitiesaretakenupintheconcludingchapterofthisreport.

References

Brownlee,J.2001.SustainableTransportinHongKong:TheDynamicsofthe
TransportrelatedDecisionMakingProcess.CivicExchange,HongKong.

Cervero,R.1998.TheTransitMetropolis:AGlobalInquiry,Washington,D.C.,
IslandPress.

HongKongGovernmentDevelopmentBureau, 2006. Hong Kong 2030: Planning

Vision and Strategy, 2006.

HongKongGovernmentTransportBranch,1994.RailwayDevelopmentStrategy.

HongKongTransportDepartment,2003,TravelCharacteristicsSurvey2002.

Leeds,P.2006.EvolutionofUrbanTransport,LandUse/TransportPlanningin
HongKong:TheEndofanEra,H.DimitriouandA.Cook,eds.,Averbury,
England,Aldershot.

McCarthy,C.1996.TheMassTransitRailwayandUrbanPlanninginHong
Kong:AnEssentialPartnership,Planning&Development,Vol.12,No.1,pp.2630.

Meakin,R.1989.HongKongsMassTransitRailway:VitaandViable.RailMass
TransitforDevelopeingCountries,London,ThomasTelfordLimited.

Planning,EnvironmentandLandsBureau,1998.TerritorialDevelopmentStrategy
Review:AResponsetoChangeandChallenges,GovernmentofHongKong,Special
AdministrativeRegion.

Pryor,E.2006.ParallelDevelopmentofStrategicLandUseandTransport
Planning:ThecaseoftheTerritorialDevelopmentStrategy,LandUse/Transport
PlanninginHongKong:TheEndofanEra,HDimitriouandA.Cook,eds.,
Avebury,Aldershot,England,pp.5591.

111

Runnacles,T.2006.PublicTransportNetworkandLandUseImpacts,Land
Use/TransportPlanninginHongKong:TheEndofanEra,HDimitriouandA.Cook,
eds.,Avebury,Aldershot,England,pp.93113.

112


PartIII
ComparativeExperiencesandExtensionofR+P

HowdootherAsiancitieswithworldclassrailwaysystemsfinancecapital
investmentsandcoordinateinfrastructureandlanddevelopment?Chapter
EightinvestigatesthisquestionbyexaminingexperiencesinmetropolitanTokyo
andSingapore.TokyoandotherlargeJapanesecitieshavealongtraditionof
privatecompaniesbundlingtogetherrailwayandnewtowndevelopment.As
populationgrowthhasslowed,theincreasedrisksofrailwayinvestmentshave
promptedashifttowardgovernmentsupportedfinancingofsystemexpansion
inrecentyears.ChapterEightreviewsrecentexperienceswithjointrailway
expansionandlanddevelopmentinTokyo,focusingonpublicprivate
partnershiparrangements.Thoughsmallerinpopulation,Singaporehas
achievedaremarkableamountofhighqualitydevelopmentarounditsrail
stations.Afundamentallydifferentapproachtorailinfrastructurefinancehas
beenadoptedinSingapore,however,onebasedoncrosssubsidizingbothpublic
transportandhousingdevelopmentthroughhighchargesandfeespassedonto
motorists.ChapterNinelookstothefuturebyaddressinghowexperienceswith
transitvaluecaptureandjointdevelopmentinHongKong,Tokyo,and
SingaporemightbeextendedtootherrapidlygrowingcitiesofAsia,focusing
specificallyonthePeoplesRepublicofChina.Withmorethan25largescalerail
investmentseitheronthegroundorintheworks,Chinapresentsunprecedented
opportunitiesforintroducingprogrammeslikeR+Ptoachievebothsustainable
financeandsustainableurbanism.Keyinsightsandlessonsfromthisresearch
arealsopresentedintheclosingchapter.

113

114

ChapterEight

ComparativeExperiences
inTokyoandSingapore

8.1Geographies,Economies,andDemographics

Intermsoftheirglobaleconomicstandingandgeographicalsettings,thecity
regionsofTokyoandSingaporeareworthyinternationalcomparisonstoHong
Kong.LikeHongKong,thesetwoeastAsianmegacitiesareknownfor
progressiveandcreativeapproachestotransitfinanceandtransit/landuse
integration(Table8.1).

Ascitiesgo,HongKongandSingaporematchupreasonablywell.HongKong
hasabout6.9millioninhabitantswithinitstotalareaof1,107sqkm.Singapore
hassome4.3millionresidentswholivewithina699sqkmislandterritory.
HongKong,however,hasfarlessdevelopablelandresultinginmuchhigher
urbanizeddensities(26,473peoplepersqkmurbanizedareacomparedto6,211
peoplepersqkminSingapore).InthecaseofTokyo,theareathatmostclosely
correspondstoHongKonginscaleandpopulationisa1520kmradiusfromthe
cityshistoricalcenter(Edo).ReferredtoasTokyo23Ward,this621sqkmarea
ishometo8.5millioninhabitants.Itsdensityof13,600inhabitantspersqkm
fallsbetweenthatofHongKongandSingapore.MuchlargeristheTokyo
GreaterMetropolitanArea(GMA),whichcapturestheurbanizedareas
expansivelaborshed:13,550kminsizewith34.2millioninhabitants.1

Since2000,thethreecityregionshavegrownatcontrastingrates.While
Singaporespopulationincreasedbyaround8percentbetween2000and2005,
HongKongspopulationchangedlittleoverthisperiod.DespiteJapansoverall
declineinpopulation(attributabletolowbirthratesandlimitedinmigration),
theTokyo23WardandTokyoGMAwitnessedpopulationgrowthof4.0%and
3.2%respectivelyoverthepastfiveyears.

InadditiontotheTokyo23Ward,theTokyoGMAincludesthesurroundingprefecturesof
Saitama,Chiba,KanagawaandspecialadministrativemunicipalsofYokohama,Kawasakiand
Chiba.

115

Table8.1.Population,Area,andDensity:HongKong,TokyoandSingapore,2005
Singapore
HongKong
Tokyo
GreatMetropolitanArea(upper)

&23Ward(lower)
70km

Map

50km
30km
7.5km

10.0km

5.0km

7.5km

2.5km

5.0km
2.5km

GreatMetropolitanArea
15.0km
10.0km

5.0km

Tokyo23ward

Population,
2005
Area
(sqkm)
Density
(peoplepersq
km),2005
Population
Growth%
20002005

6,935,900
1,107(Total)
262(UrbanizedArea)
6,266(Total)
26,473(UrbanizedArea)

34,196,915
8,457,418
13,556
621
2,523
13,608

1.02

3.15
3.97

4,341,800

699

6,211

8.07

116

Age

8075-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
0

Over65yr%
1564yr%
014yr%
HHSize
Foreign
Workers%

10

8075-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4

Age

HongKong

Age

Age
Distribution

Table8.2.DemographicPatterns:HongKong,TokyoandSingapore,2005
Singapore
Tokyo23Ward

10

8075-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
0

12.4
73.9
13.7

18.4
69.8
11.9

8.4
72.0
19.7

3.0

3.4*

3.6**

7.5

3.5*

18.3

*Datain2004
**Datain2003

117

10


GDPUS$Billion

HongKong

GDPperCapita
GDPAnnual
GrowthRate%
EconomicStructure
(Employmentbase)

Table8.3.EconomicStructure:HongKong,TokyoandSingapore,2005
Singapore
Tokyo
177.7
760.3*
25,622
61,468*
7.0
0.7%

0.9*

6.4

0.0%

13.1%

116.5
26,833

0.0%
21.6%

Primary

30.6%

Secondary
Tertiary

69.4%

86.2%

Unemployment
Rate%
ImportUS$Million

78.4%

ExportUS$Million

5.6
294,869
284,832

4.7
144,430**
136,983**

3.1
214,962
246,795

FDIUS$million
Inward
Outward

568,853
503,018

103,674***
432,362***

207,009
116,451

*TokyoMetropolitanArea
**2004
***EntireJapan

118

Thedemographicmakeupofthethreecityregionsalsodiffers(Table8.2).
Amongthethree,Singaporehasamoreyouthfulpopulation.Fueling
Singaporescomparativelyrapidpopulationgrowthhasbeenaninfluxofforeign
workers(18.3%ofSingaporestotalpopulation).Bycomparison,Tokyohasan
olderpopulationprofileandrelativelyfewforeignworkers(3.5%ofworkers).
HongKongsdemographicprofileliessomewherebetweenthatofSingapore
andTokyowiththeexceptionofhouseholdsize,whichtendstobesmaller
around3personsperhousehold.

Economically,TokyoisafarwealthierthaneitherHongKongandSingapore
(Table8.3).In2005,itspercapitaGDPwasmorethantwiceashigh.However
thisischangingasreflectedbythecitysrelativelytepidrateofincomegrowth
(0.9%annualincrease).Allthreecityregionshavestrongtertiary(servicebased)
economies,whichexplaintheirhighcentralcitydensities(thatconfer
agglomerationeconomies).HongKongandSingaporearemoreactivein
internationaltradingthanTokyo.ForeignDirectInvestments(FDIs)alsovary.
Tokyoseconomyisorientedmoretoinvestingabroadwhereastheopposite
holdsforSingaporeandHongKong.HongKongaccountsforfarmoreforeign
investmentthaneitherTokyoorSingapore.Lastly,HongKongsjoblessnessrate
isslightlyhigherthanintheothertwocities.

8.2WorldClassRailwaySystems

Highdensitiesandhealthyeconomicgrowthhavesustainedworldclassrailway
systemsinallthreecitiesandviceversa(Table8.4).Tokyohasthelargest
railwaynetworkamongthethree,howeverasrevealedbyTable8.4,Hong
Kongsrailwaydensityinitsbuiltupurbanizedareaisexceptionallyhigh(0.64
kmpersqkm).ComparedtoU.S.andmanyEuropeancities,HongKong,
Tokyo,andSingaporehavespartancarownershiplevels.Roadspaceisalsofar
morerestrictedinHongKong.

119

Table8.4.RailwayandCarRoadwaySystems:
HongKong,Tokyo,andSingapore,2005

Railway:
Length
(onewaytrackkm)
Density(trackkmper
Sqkmlandarea)
#Stations
#ofOperators
TypesofOperators

HongKong1

167.9
0.15
0.64a
85
2
Private(1)
Public(1)

TokyoGMA2

Singapore3

3,216.5

138.2

0.24

1,501
12
Private(8)
QuasiPrivate(1)
FormerPublic(2)
Public(1)

18.89b

0.20

96
2
Private(2)

Roadway/AutoSystem:

1.77
RoadDensity(one
4.50
wayKmperSqKm)
CarOwnership

c
Vehicleper1000people
51
263
93
1MTRC&KCRC
2EightMajorPrivateCompanies,TsukubaExpress(TX),JapanRailwayEastandTokyoMetro,
andTokyoMunicipalSubway.SomeoftheoperatorsoperateoutsideofTokyoGMA.
3MRT+LRT
aUrbanizedArea
bFY2001
cFY2004

Tokyo

In2005,arailwaynetworkof3,216directionalkmoftrackand1,501stations
servedacommutershedthatexpandedmorethan100kmfromthecentralTokyo
station.Tokyosrailwaynetworkcomprisingamixofrailwaylinesofvarying
sizesownedbypublic,privateandquasiprivateoperatorsis,byfar,the
worldslargest(Map8.1andTable8.5).EncirclingTokyoscoreareaisthe
Yamanoteline,withmajorterminalsandhighriseofficedevelopmentsatornear
theTokyoMarunouchi,Shibuya,Shinjuku,Shinagawa,Ikebukuro,andUeno
stations.WithintheYamanoteloopisadensenetworkofboththenow
privatizedTokyoMetroandpubliclyownedEidanSubwayservices.Also
crisscrossingcentralTokyoareseverallinesoftheprivatizedJapanRailway(JR)
East(formerlythepubliclyownedJapanNationalRailway).Radiatingoutward
fromJREastsYamanoteloopisathicketofprivatelybuiltraillines,plusJR
Eastsheavyraillines.Tokyosprivateraillinesservesuburbanareasand
connecttomajorterminusesontheYamanoteloop,allowingpassengersto

120

switchtotheTokyoMetroorEidansubway.

Tokyosradialrailwaysystemsupportsandreinforcestheregionsmonocentric
structure.Convergingraillinesandroadwayshavealsotranslatedintoextreme
congestion.Publictransportridershiphasbeendecliningoverthepast15years
ingreaterTokyo,whichhasexacerbatedcentralcitycongestiontosomedegree.

Table8.5.MajorRailwayOperatorsinthe
TokyoGreaterMetropolitanArea,2005
Company/Agency
Tobu
Seibu
Keisei
Keio
Odakyu
Tokyu
Keikyu
Sotetsu
JREast
TokyoMetro
ToeiSubway
TX
Total

Type
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
FormerPublic
FormerPublic
Public
QuasiPrivate

Length
km
463.3
176.6
102.4
84.7
120.5
100.1
87.0
35.9
1,698.3
183.2
106.2
58.3
3,216.5

#ofStations
202
92
64
69
70
98
72
25
516
168
105
20
1,501

Passenger
kmmillion YearOpened
12,667
1897
8,669
1912
3,508
1909
7,186
1910
10,528
1923
9,469
1922
6,220
1898
2,604
1917
76,694 1987(1870)a
16,356 2004(1927)a
5,291
1927
NA
2005(1991)a
159,192

aYearsinparenthesesdenoteyearofopeningasapublicoperator.Yearsnotinparentheses

denoteyearoftransformationfromapurelypublicoperator.

Singapore

Singaporehighlyregardedrailservicesgrewoutofthe1971ConceptPlan.This
visionaryplancalledforanewmassrapidtransitsystemtoserveastheisland
nationslifeline,linkingresidentsofnewhousingestatestojobs,shopping
centers,andrecreationalofferingsthroughouttheisland.In1987,theeastwest
MRTlinebeganservice,followedbytheopeningoftwonorthsouthspursin
1990.Together,theyformeda67km,42stationsystemcompletedtwoyears
aheadofscheduleandunderbudget(US$2.2billion).Anadditional16kmof
aeriallineand6stationswereaddedin1996,linkingthetwonorthsouthlines
viaanorthernloop.Supplementingheavyrail(MRT)servicesare56kmsof
lightrail(LRT)serviceswith48stationsplusanextensivebusnetwork.A
duopolyofSBSTransitandSMRTCorporationoverseeandoperateSingapores

121

Map8.1.RailwayNetworkandMajorPublic,Private,andQuasiprivate
OperatorsintheTokyoGreatMetropolitanArea.

publictransportnetwork.Despiteexpansionofbusservices,Singaporesrail
networkhasbeenincreasingitsshareoftransittrips:since1995,railridership
hasmorethandoubledandmorerecentlybeguntocutintothebusmarket
(Figure8.1).By2012,Singaporesrailnetworkisslatedtoexpandbyroughly
30%withthecompletionofCircleLine,BoonLayExtensionandDowntown
Extension(Table8.6andMap8.2).

122

Ave.DailyRidership(000passengertrips)

3,500
3,000

Bus

2,920

2,785
(4.6%down)

2,500
2,000
1,500

1,409
(98.7%up)

MRT+LRT
1,000
709
Taxi

500

FY05/06

FY04/05

FY03/04

FY02/03

FY01/02

FY00/01

FY99/00

FY98/99

FY97/98

FY96/97

FY95/96

FY94/95

Figure8.1.RidershipChangesforMRTandLRTRailServicesandBusLines:
FY94/95andFY05/06.Source:SingaporeLTA,http://www.lta.gov.sg

Table8.6.MRTandLRTLinesinSingapore
Line

Year
Opened
1987
1987
2003
20132018a
20102011a
1999
2003
2005

Operator
LengthKm
#ofStation
EastWestLine
SMRT
45.4
29
NorthSouthLine
SMRT
44
25
NorthEastLine
SBS
20
15
DowntownLine

40
33
CircleLine
SMRT
33.3
29
BukitPanjangLRT
SMRT
7.8
14
SengkangLRT
SBS
10.7
11
PunggolLRT
SBS
10.3
15
Totalb

138.2
96
aProjecteddatesofopeningdifferentsegmentsofline.
bOnlyincludescompletedportionsofthesystem.Becausemanystationsservice
multiplelines,thestationtotalislessthanthesumofstationsamongtheeightlines.

123

East-West Line

Bukit Panjang LRT

North-South Line

Sengkang LRT

North-East Line

Punggol LRT

Circle Line
Downtown Line

Map8.2.MRTandLRTNetworkinSingapore

InSingapore,thevisionofbuildingaworldclasspublictransportsystemhas
beencomplementedbyrestrictionsonandhighpriceschargedforautomobile
ownershipandusage.Overthepastthreedecades,Singaporeofficialshave
increasinglytightenedthenooseontheislandscarpopulationthroughasteady
streamofautomobilesurtaxes,roadusesurcharges,andavehiclequotasystem
inrecognitionofthenationslandconstraintsandtoavoidthetrafficgridlock.
Singaporeisthefirstplaceanywheretointroduceroadpricing.Singapores
AreaLicensingScheme(ALS),introducedin1975,wasreplacedin1998by
ElectronicRoadPricing(ERP).TheERPdeductschargesfromastoredvaluein
vehicledebitcardaccordingtotimeofdayandvehicleclass.About6million
transactionsperdayweremadethroughERPin2003.InadditiontoERP,
Singaporescarownershiplevels(91carownersper1,000inhabitantsin2005)
havebeenmoderatedthroughanelectronicopenbiddingsystemcalledthe
VehicleQuotaScheme(VQS)thatlimitsannualvehicleregistrations.
Supplementalchargesforvehicleregistrationfurtherincreasethecostofowning
acar.AllmotorvehicletaxproceedsgointoaConsolidatedFundcontrolledby
Singaporescentralgovernment.ThusunlikeintheUnitedStatesandmany
industrializedpartsoftheworld,automobilerelatedrevenuesarenotearmarked

124

forhighwayprojectsbutratherarecombinedwithallrevenuessourcesand
distributedtomultiplegovernmentsectorsandprojects,includinghousingand
publictransport.

8.3DevelopmentStrategiesandRailways

AsinHongKong,publicpolicieshaveplayedavitalroleinadvancingtransit
orienteddevelopment(TOD)inbothgreaterTokyoandSingapore.Inthecaseof
Tokyo,TODprinciplesareembodiedintworecentinitiatives:JapanNational
GovernmentsUrbanRenewalprogramandtheTokyoMetropolitan
GovernmentsMasterPlan.GuidingTODinSingaporeinrecentyearshavebeen
thecitystatesConceptPlan2001,theMasterPlan2003,andseveralhighprofile
housinginitiatives.

Tokyo

Japansnationalurbanrenewalpolicy(ToshiSaisei)hasnoticeablyaltered
Tokyoscityscapeinrecentyears.TheUrbanRenewalLawof2002wasenactedto
createurbanorientedprojectsthatincreaseeconomicproductivityandglobal
competitivenesswithemphasisgiventoimprovingpublicinfrastructure,
relaxinglanduseregulations,andleveragingprivateinvestmentthroughpublic
grants.IncentralTokyo,2,514haoflandlocatedin8districtshasbeenslated
forlargescaleprivatebasedredevelopment,includinghighrise,mixeduse
projectsnearmajorrailwaystationsontheJRYamanoteLoop(suchasShinjuku,
Shibuya,TokyoMarunouchi,andAkihabara)(Figure8.2).

Nationalurbanrenewalpolicieshavebeencomplementedbyrailoriented
decentralizationpoliciesatthelocallevel.Toalleviatecentralcitycongestion,
theTokyoMetropolitanGovernmenthassoughttotransformTokyofroma
monocentrictoamorepolycentricurbanstructure.TokyoMetropolitan
Governments2001masterplan,calledMegalopolisBeltStructure(Kanjo
MegalopolisKouzou),envisagesafuturecityregioncomprisedofafivedistinct
districts:(i)centercore;(ii)baywaterfrontbelt;(iii)livingenvironmentbelt;(iv)
outercoreinteractionbelt;and(v)naturalenvironmentbelt(Figure8.3).The
planidentifiesamultimodaltransportationnetwork(comprisingrailways,
roadways,andairports)asthechiefmechanismforsteeringgrowthintothese
designatedareas.

125

UrbanRenewalDistrictsinTokyo

8Districts2,514ha

YamanoteLoop

Ikebukuro

AkihabaraKanda

Loop4th lineDistrict

Shinjyuku

Akihabara

Shinjyuku
Tokyo

TokyoYurakucho

ShinbashiAkasakaRoppongi
BayDistrict

Shibuya
Shibuya

Ohsaki

Ohsaki

RailStation
UrbanRenewalDistrict

Metropolitan #ofDistrict Areaha

Government/
Prefecture
Tokyo
8
Kanagawa
11

Municipalities

2,514
615 Yokohama,Kawasaki,
Sagamihara,Fujisawa,Atsugi
Saitama
2
115
Chiba
4
185 Chiba,Kashiwa
Total
25
3,429
Figure8.2.JapanNationalGovernmentsEightUrbanRenewalDistrictsand
MajorTerminalStationsinTokyo.Source:theJapanNationalGovernment,
theUrbanRenewalOffice

Inthecentercorezone,severallargescaleredevelopmentprojectsareunderway
thattakeadvantageofTokyoshighlydevelopedsubway.Howeverinabreak
fromtradition,whatinthepastwouldhavebeenexclusivelyofficecommercial
projectstodayalsofeatureprofessionalclass,highendhousingandconsumer
services.Therealestatemarketaroundseveralcentralcitystations,notably
Akihabara,Tokyo,Shinjuku,andShinagawa,havebeenabuzzwithactivityin
recentyears,becoming24hour,7daysaweekplaces(Figure8.4).

126

Living Environment
Natural Environment
Center Core

Bay Waterfront

Outer Core Interaction

Figure8.3.FivePlanningZonesinTokyosMegapolitanBeltStructure
Source:TokyoMetropolitanGovernment2001

22
5

17
28

15

18
30

Shibuya

24

21

11
1

7
16

Akihabara

26

3
6

25

29
20

27

23

9
10

15

14

12
13

Tokyo
Shinagawa

Figure8.4.PlanningAreasandTerminalStationRedevelopmentsinthe
CenterCore.Source:TokyoMetropolitanGovernment2001

127

Inthelivingenvironmentbeltthatringsthecore,mixeduseTODisalso
planned.However,thestationarealandmarketsinthisdistrictarenotasstrong
asinthecentercore.Also,landassemblyforstationredevelopmentoutsidethe
urbancorecanbecostlyduetofragmentedpropertyownershipandlesscentral
governmentaidforredevelopment.Futakotamagawaisoneofthefewlarge
scaleprojectsinthelivingenvironmentzonethatistakingadvantageof
railwayproximityandshowingsignsofeconomicvitality(Figure8.5).

Kitasenju Station

Futagotamagwa
Station
Key Stations

Sangenjaya Station

Figure8.5.StationRedevelopmentsintheBuiltEnvironmentBelt
Source:TokyoMetropolitanGovernment2001

Intheoutercoreinteractionbelt,universityparks,researchinstitutes,high
techmanufacturing,andITindustriesarebeingbuilt.Mostareorientedtoward
expresswayinterchanges.However,oneormoreraillinesalsoserveanumber
ofnewhightechdevelopments,givingrisetoamoreclustered,mixeduseform
thantypicallyfoundwithhightechindustries.Whileabeltway(Kenohdou)is
beingconstructedwithintheoutercoreinteractionbelt,soisTsukubaExpress
(TX),whichspansacrossTokyoseasternside.Minamimachidastationisan
exampleofalargescale,mixeduseprojectintheinteractionbeltthathasbotha
transitorientedandautoorienteddesign(Figure8.6).

128

RailwayNetwork

HighwayNetwork

TX
Kenohdou

TamaNT

Minamimachida

Kashiwanoha

Figure8.6.ProjectedHighwayandRailwayNetworksandStation
DevelopmentsintheOuterCoreInteractionBelt.
Source:TokyoMetropolitanGovernment2001

Singapore

TheUrbanRedevelopmentAuthority(URA),anarmofSingaporescentral
government,hasassumedthemajorresponsibilityforplanningandguiding
urbandevelopmentintheterritoryundertheguiseofalongtermstrategicplan
(ConceptPlan2001)andamediumtermimplementationplan(MasterPlan2003).2
TheConceptPlan2001projectsatotalof5.5millioninhabitantssome50yearsinto
thefuturewithintheislandstateslimitedgeographicterritory(Figure8.7).So
thatSingaporeremainscompetitiveintheglobalmarketplace,theplanseeksto
lurehighvalueaddedbusinessesandinvestorstotheislandstatebycreating

SingaporesMasterPlan2003addsspecificitytothelongerrangestrategicplanfor
purposesofguidingdevelopmentoverthenext10to15years.Itisreviewedeveryfive
years,andtranslateslongertermstrategiesintodetailedimplementationprojects.Italso
specifiespermissiblelandusesanddensityconditionsoneverylandparcelinSingapore.

129

Figure8.7.SingaporesConceptPlan2001
Source:SingaporeUrbanRedevelopmentAuthority(URA)

highqualitylivingenvironments,preservingnaturalhabitats,andbuilding
worldclasstransportinfrastructure.

AsSingaporeseconomybecomesincreasinglyorientedtoknowledgebased
globalservices,mostfinance,information,andbusinessservicesectorsare
locatinginthecitysCentralArea.Tosupporturbanagglomerationsaswellas
backofficeactivitiesinsubcenters,adenseMRT+LRTnetworkisenvisaged.
TheConceptPlan2001callsforsome500kmsoffutureradialandringrailway
servicesthatlinkoutlyingandcoreareasinadditiontoaccommodatingcross
islandtravelthatbypassesthecore(Figure8.8).Threeregionalcentres
Tampines,Woodlands,andJurongEastareconnectedtothecoreviathe
MRT+LRTnetwork.TheConceptPlangivesparticularattentiontolinkingjobs
andhousingviarailtransit.AsmorejobsarecreatedintheNorth,NorthEast
andEastsubregions,moreresidentialneighborhoodsareandwillbedeveloped
withinwalkablecatchmentsofMTRandLRTstations,particularlyinthewestern
partofthecity.

130

8.8.LongRangeRailNetworkPlanandCityStructuretheConstellation
Plan.Source:SingaporeUrbanRedevelopmentAuthority(URA)ConceptPlan2001

MostofSingaporesnewtownhousingdevelopmentspredateyetanticipated
theMRT+LRTnetwork(Figure8.9).InSingapore,newtownsandhighquality
railtransithavebeencodependent.Indeed,newtownhousingconstruction
peakedinthe1980swhentheMRTwasbeingplannedandbuilt(Figure8.10).By
2007,SingaporesHousingandDevelopmentBoard(HDB)hadbuiltsome
872,000flatsthatwerehometonearly3millionresidents(or81%oftotal
population).AlmostallofthishousingwassitedalongMRTcorridors.At
buildout,some1.4milliondwellingunitswillhavebeenconstructedin24new
towns.Criticaltolinkingperipheralnewtownsisthe33km,29stationMRT
CircleLinethatwillconnectfoursubregionalcenters:Bishan;BuonaVista;
Serangoon;andPayaLebar(Figure8.11).

131

MRT & LRT

Figure8.9.NewTownHousingDevelopments(24Towns;871,813flats;
2,980,600residents;7,435ha)andMRT+LRTnetworkinFY2006/2007.
Source:HousingandDevelopmentBoard(HDB)

250,000
CommercialDevelopments

200,000

DwellingUnits

150,000
100,000
50,000

200005

199600

199195

198690

198185

197680

197175

196670

196065

Figure8.10.HDBsDwellingUnitsandCommercialDevelopmentssince1960
Source:HousingandDevelopmentBoard(HDB)

132

Buona
Vista

Bishan

Serangoon

Paya
Lebar

Figure8.11.0FourSubRegionalCentersandMRTCircleLineDevelopment
by2010.Source:LandTransportAuthority(LTA)

8.4

RailwayFinanceandPerformance

GiventhefocusofthisstudyonMTRCsR+Pprogrammeasaformoftransit
finance,wenowturntothequestionofhowrailwayinvestmentshavebeen
fundedinthetwocomparisoncityregionsaswellastheoverallfinancial
performanceoftheseinvestments.Asdiscussedbelow,TokyoandSingapore
haveadoptedmarkedlydifferentapproachestopayingforrailway
infrastructure.

Tokyo

GreaterTokyohasalongtraditionofprivatefinancingofsuburbanrailway
developmentthroughcapturinglandvalueincreasescreatedbyimproving
accessibilityviapublictransit.Thishashistoricallyoccurredthroughapublic
privatepartnershipwhereinTokyosmetropolitangovernmentgrantedexclusive
franchisestoprivaterailwayconglomeratessoastotransferthefinancialburden
totheprivatesectorbutalsotocreateaclosenexusofrailwayinvestmentsand
newtowndevelopment.3

R. Cervero, The Transit Metropolis, Washington, D.C., Island Press, 1998.

133

FinancialPerformance

LikeHongKongsMTRC,Tokyosrailwaycompanieshavehistorically
leveragedrealestatedevelopmenttobothpayforinfrastructureandproducea
profitforshareholders.Moreover,theyhavesimilarlydevelopedancillary
projectslikeinstationconvenienceshoppingandintegratedshoppingmalls.
Duringthe1980sattheheightofrailway/newtowncodevelopment,railway
companieswereearninginvestmentreturnsonancillaryrealestateprojectsin
therangeof50%to70%(Cervero,1998).

TokyuCorporationisgreaterTokyoslargestprivaterailwaycompanyandwas
amongthefirsttoadvancethebusinessmodelofrailway/newtownco
development.Table8.7aswellasFigures8.12and8.13showthatinFiscalYear
2006around10%ofTokyuCorporationsrevenuescamefromrealestateprojects
whichwhenmatchedwithcostsyieldedmorethana20%rateofreturn.Real
estateprojectsgeneratedevenhighersharesofrevenuesandhigherratesof
returnamongmostofTokyosotherprivaterailwaycompanies,allofwhose
railwaynetworksaresmallerthanTokyuCorporations.Foralleightprivate
railways,returnsfromrealestateexceededcompaniesoverallprofitmargins.

Evenmorenoticeableisthesubstantialfinancialrolethatrealestate
developmentplaysforTokyostwoformerpublicrailways,JREastandTokyo
Metro.InthecaseofJREast,theseriousfiscalcrisisfacedbytheformerJapan
NationalRailway(withanaccumulateddebtofUS$300billion)ledto
privatizationin1987.Amongotherchangesthatoccurred,JREastwasgivenby
thenationalgovernmentlargedevelopablelandparcelsaroundterminalstations
thatcouldbetransformedintoprofitablecommercialventures.InFY2006,real
estateyieldedmorethan40%returnsoninvestmentforbothformerpublic
railways,albeitTokyoMetrohasnotaggressivelypursuedlargescale
development,relyinginsteadonfareboxreturnstocovercosts.Similarly,the
publiclyownedandoperatedmetrosystem,ToeiSubway,reliesmainlyon
transportationincome(whichinitscase,failedtocovercostsinFY2006).

Infiscalyear2006,thepoorestfinancialperformeramongallrailwayentitieswas
theTsukubaExpress,aquasiprivaterailwaycompanythatopenedin2005.
Althoughitnowincursdeficits,TsukubaExpressisexpectedtorunintheblack
incomingyearsowingtolargescaleredevelopmentthatoccurringalongits
corridors.

134

Table8.7.FinancialPerformanceofMajorRailwayOwnerOperatorsinthe
TokyoGreatMetropolitanArea,FY2006
Owner
Operator

Type

Tokyu(TK)
Tobu(TB)
Odakyu(OK)
Keio(KO)
Keikyu(KK)
Sotetsu(ST)
Keisei(KS)
Seibu(SB)
JREast(JRE)
TokyoMetro(TM)
ToeiSubway(TS)
TsukubaExpress
(TX)

Private

Former
Public
Public
Quasi
Private

Revenues
Transport
Total
%
Yen
Million
1,457.6
13.2
701.1
30.7
692.4
24.2
477.2
27.3
381.6
30.6
328.8
12.9
259.8
43.3
208.7
48.2
1,662.8
50.0
330.7
96.8
182.6
99.5
26.8

Real
Estate
%
10.4
10.4
11.2
5.7
12.6
23.3
8.3
17.7
11.9
3.2
0.0

Others
%

0.0

0.0

100.0

76.4
59.0
64.6
67.0
56.8
63.8
48.4
34.2
38.2
0.0
0.5

Return(Revenues/Expenses)%
Others
Total
Transport
Real
%
%
%
Estate
%
5.8
15.4
20.7
2.6
7.9
16.4
15.2
2.8
7.8
18.6
21.6
2.3
10.0
17.9
55.3
4.5
10.4
20.1
21.1
3.8
7.8
23.6
22.2
0.9
9.9
17.8
22.2
2.1
14.1
23.0
39.4
4.6
34.7
62.3
42.3
8.8
36.6
36.4
43.8
NA
1.2
1.3
NA
9.2
8.6

8.6

NA

NA

1,800

YenBillion

1,500

Others
RealEstate

1,200

Transportation

900
600
300
0
TK

TB

OK

KO

KK

ST

KS

SB

JRE

TM

TS

TX

Figure8.12.RevenueStructureofMajorRailwayCompaniesintheTokyo
GreatMetropolitanArea,FY2006

70
Transportation

60

RealEstate

50

Others

40
%

30
20
10
0
10

TK

TB

OK

KO

KK

ST

KS

SB

JRE

TM

TS

TX

20

Figure8.13.RatesofReturn(Revenues/Expenses)AmongMajorRailway
CompaniesintheTokyoGreatMetropolitanArea,FY2006
135

Figures8.14and8.15providefurtherbreakdownsofrevenuesourcesofTokyu
CorporationandtheprivatizedJREast,respectively.InTokyuscase,retail
activitiesinandaroundrailwaystationshasbeenincreasinglyturnedtoasa
sourceofincome.Whileconstruction(themajoractivityoftheothercategory)
wasthebiggestrevenuegeneratorin2000,todayitsincomeroleismodest.
Similarlyrealestateincomehasflattened.Thisisinlargepartbecauseasan
oldercompany,TokyuCorporationhasalreadytappedintomanyofthereal
estateandconstructionpossibilitiesofitslandholdings.Inaregionwithfairly
modestpopulationgrowthalbeitrisingincomes,TokyuCorporationhasfound
moreprofitinancillaryretailthanstationareadevelopmentinrecentyears.

InJREastscase,Figure8.15showsthatnontransportrevenueshavegradually
risensinceprivatization.UnlikeTokyuCorporationandotherprivaterailway
companies,JREasthasshiedawayfromhousingconstruction,focusinginstead
onretailandofficedevelopmenton,above,andnearitsterminalstations.

YenBillion

1,600
Others

1,200

LeisureandService
800

Retail
RealEstate

400

Transportation

FY2006

FY2005

FY2004

FY2003

FY2002

FY2001

FY2000

FY1999

Figure8.14.TokyuCorporation(TK)RevenueStructure,FY1999FY2006
Source:TokyoCorporationAnnualReports

136

2,000
OtherServices

YenBillion

1,600

ShoppingCenters&Office
Buildings

1,200
800

StationSpaceUtilization

400

NonTransportTotal

FY1990
FY1991
FY1992
FY1993
FY1994
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
FY2000
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006

Transport

Figure8.15.JREast(JRE)RevenueStructure,FY1990FY2006
Source:JREastFactSheet

RailwayInfrastructureFinancingMethods

Asoutlinedinthepriorsection,Tokyosprivaterailwaycompanieshave
historicallyfinancedrailwayinvestmentsandextensionsusingthevaluecapture
model.Howeverrisingconstructioncostsandashrinkingsupplyoflowcost
agriculturallandfromwhichtocapturevaluethroughTODhaveforcedmanyto
turntootherfundingsourcesinrecentyears.Infiscalyear2005,almostallof
theUS$2.67billioninvestedinrailwayswenttoprojectsthatincreasedcapacity,
enhancedsafety,orupgradedservices(notablytrackelevationprojects)as
opposedtonewlineconstruction.Inadditiontoequitysavings,privaterailway
companiesreliedonacombinationoffareboxrevenues,governmentgrants,and
borrowingtopayfornewinvestments.Betweenfiscalyears1999and2005,low
interestloansunderwrittenbytheDevelopmentBankofJapanhavecovered43%
to48%ofrailwayinvestmentcostswiththeremaindercomingfromprivate
railwaycompaniesownsources.4Inrecentyears,theresponsibilityfornew
railwaylineshasabruptlyshiftedtothepublicsector,withprivateoperators
focusedonaligningtheiroperationstorunonnewlinesasefficientlyand
seamlesslyaspossible.

Japans Development Bank is backed by national trust funds (Zaito), however plans to privatize the Bank
in 2008 will likely result in a shift to private financial funding of private-based urban projects in coming
years. Self-financed portions of capital investments are often underwritten by government bonds sponsored
by state-owned enterprises as well as other government programs that incentivize private infrastructure
investment.

137

Singapore

Singaporesgovernmenthascreatedaduopolytooperatemainlinepublic
transportservices.IncontrasttoTokyo,however,Singaporesgovernment
ownstheentireMRT+LRTnetwork.TwoprivateoperatorsSMRTCorporation
andSBSTransitoperatepassengerservicesunder50yearconcessions.These
backboneservicesarefedbyneighborhoodlevelbusesandprivatetaxis.
Figure8.16showsthesourcesofincomeforeachtransitoperatorinfiscalyear
2006.UnlikeHongKongandTokyo,Singaporesoperatorshavenotpursued
realestateventures.Rather,landdevelopmentistheprovinceoftwoother
authorities,asdiscussedlater.

SMRTCorporation
SBSTransit
8.3%
2.2%
4.4%

2.5%
3.8% 11.8%

MRT
LRT

MRT+LRT

Bus

8.6%
SG$788.5M 51.3%

Bus

Taxi

SG$628.6M

Rental
24.2%

Advertisement
Others

Advertisement
1.0%

81.8%

Eng&Service

Figure8.16.SMRTCorporationandSBSTransit:RevenueStructuresinFY2006

SMRTCorporation

Singaporeslargestrailwayoperator,SMRT,hasreliedprincipallyuponfarebox
receiptsandotherrevenues(likeadvertizing)tocoveroperatingcosts.Table8.8
showsthecorporationhasenjoyedrisingratesofreturninrecentyears.These
figures,however,onlypresenttheongoingexpensesofoperatingand
maintainingtheservicesanddonotincludecapitaldepreciationanddebtservice.
Singaporescentralgovernmentshoulderstheburdenofrailwayinfrastructure
costs,usingother(nontransit)incometocovertheseoutlays.

SMRTCorporationsLRTsystemhasfailedtocoveritsoperatingcostsalthough
itsfinancialperformancehasimprovedmorerecently.Becauseofregulated
tariffs,thefinancialperformanceofbusandtaxiserviceshasdeterioratedin
recentyearswithgovernmenttransfersusedtomakeuplosses.SMRT
Corporationsrentalandadvertisingbusinessesaresmallincomegeneratorsbut

138

yieldhighratesofreturnduetothehighvolumeofpedestriantrafficaround
MRTstation.

SBSTransit

Singaporesotheroperator,SBSTransit,hasconsistentlycoveredoperatingcosts
andgeneratedanetprofitofaround10%inrecentyears(Table8.9).(SinceSBS
Transitsoperatingcostsareconsolidatedacrossallmodes,onlytotal
revenue/costratiosareavailable.)EventhoughSBSTransitsMRT+LRTlines
wereopenedonlyrecently(in2003and2005),theyhaveproducedsteadilyrising
revenues.

Table8.8.SMRTCorporationRevenueStructureandReturn
(Revenue/Expense)FY2001FY2006.Source:SMRTCorporation

FY01
Revenue,SG$Million
MRT
375.0
LRT
8.4
Bus
57.1
Taxi
20.2
Rental
29.6
Advertising

Eng.&
6.6
Service
Total
496.8
Return(Revenue/Expense),%
MRT
120.5
LRT
81.9
Bus
112.3
Taxi
119.2
Rental
851.3
Advertising

Eng.&
154.5
Service
Total
125.1

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY06

384.4
7.8
185.3
60.5
30.7

366.1
7.5
185.4
57.7
20.6
10.8

366.3
7.6
185.1
70.3
20.5
10.7

381.0
7.8
185.0
79.3
26.2
13.0

404.4
8.1
190.7
68.1
34.6
17.0

17.0

61.5

64.2

60.0

65.7

685.6

709.6

724.7

752.3

788.5

118.7
71.9
107.2
112.1
892.5

119.4
63.5
108.1
105.4
627.3
283.4

120.2
76.3
106.2
106.9
557.3
278.5

132.5
91.7
105.7
101.9
498.6
276.6

134.4
89.3
103.0
93.0
367.1
285.1

131.8

117.9

112.5

104.2

106.1

118.3

116.6

117.0

122.0

122.1

139

Table8.9.SBSTransitRevenueStructure(SG$Million)andReturn
(Revenue/Expense)FY2001FY2006.Source:SBSTransit.

MRT+LRT
Bus
Advertisement
Others
TotalRevenue,
SG$million
Return
(Revenue/Expense)%

FY04
55.6
485.6
18.4
12.9

FY05
63.9
493.2
19.2
14.0

FY06
74.5
513.9
24.2
16.0

572.5

590.3

628.6

110.1

110.7

110.1

LandTransportAuthority(LTA):AutomobilerelatedOperatingRevenuesand
GovernmentGrants

Theplanning,design,construction,managementandupkeepofSingapores
MRTandLRTsystemsareoverseenbySingaporesLandTransportAuthority
(LTA).Theauthorityisalsoresponsibleforroads.Infiscalyear2005/2006,most
ofLTAsincomecamefrommanagementfees(Figure8.17).5Overonefifthof
revenuescamefromautomobilerelatedcharges,notablyfeesforvehicle
licensingandnewmotorvehicleregistration.

Duetothehighcostofrailwayinvestments,particularlysubways,evenwith
incomefromroadsandautomobileusers,LTAdoesnotgenerateenoughincome
tocoverallcosts.Theauthoritysoveralldeficithasgraduallybeenincreasing
overthepastfiveyears.Governmenttransferpayments(fromtheconsolidated
fundofthecentraltreasury)andexternalborrowings,intheformofunsecured
bonds,havemadeupthedifference.Infiscalyear2005/2006,LTAmadeasmall
contributiontogovernmentsconsolidatedfund(SG$11million)howeverwhatit
gotbackfromthecentraltreasury(SG$315million)wasmuchlarger.In
Singapore,LTAreceivesamongthelargesttransferpaymentsfromthecentral
fund,reflectinggovernmentscommitmenttobuildworldclassinfrastructure.

ManagementfeesaremoneypaidbytheMinistryofTransporttoLTAforservices
renderedinplanning,operating,maintaining,andmonitoringthelandtransport
system.
5

140

OperatingIncome
ManagementFees
1.6% 8.0%
VehicleTransitLicensingFees

5.6%
5.1%
10.9%

CompositionFines

SG$376M

NewMotorVehicleRegistration
Fees
RapidTransitSystemLeaseand
LicensingFees
Others

68.9%

TotalRevenue
SG$(millions)376
OperatingExpenditure(includesbond
709
interestanddepreciation)
OperatingDeficit
333
NonOperatingSurplus
18
NetDeficitBeforeGovernmentGrants
315
GovernmentGrants
371
ContributiontoConsolidatedFund
11
NetSurplus
45
Figure8.17.SingaporeLTA:OperatingRevenueandExpense(SGMillion)
inFY2005/2006

Housing&DevelopmentBoard(HDB)andUrbanRedevelopmentAuthority
(URA)

HDBandURAarethetwogovernmententitiesinvolvedwithlargescale
propertydevelopmentandchargedwithimplementingtheislandstatestransit
orientedConceptandMasterPlans.Inthissense,theirpropertydevelopment
rolesmostcloselyparallelthoseofHongKongsMTRCR+Pprogrammeand
Tokyosprivaterailways.

Infiscalyear2005/2006,HDBsprimarysourcesofincomecamefrominvestment
interest,propertyrentals,andcarparkingfees(ignoringprofitsfromlandsales)
(Figure8.18).StilltheBoardsoperatingandcapitalexpendituresexceeded

141

Table8.18.HDBandURDFinancialPerformances,FY2005/2006
HDB
Income

URA
Income

0.8%
1.5%
6.6%
3.9%

1.7%

Interest

Interest

6.5%
7.7%

Rental

ParkingFees

CarParking

11.8%
49.6%

14.5%

Upgrading

23.1%

Others

SG$Million3,089
ProfitfromLandSales
NetIncome*
OperatingExpenditure
CapitalExpenditure
Deficit
NetIncome/TotalExpenditure%
GovernmentGrant

RecoveryofCost
AgencyFees

ResalesandSales
Premium
AgencyFees

25.8%

46.3%

137
3,226
4,703
1,131
2,608
55.3
755

Development
Control
Others

SG$Million226
ProfitfromLandSales
NetIncome**
OperatingExpenditure
CapitalExpenditure
Surplus
NetIncome/TotalExpenditure%
ContributiontoConsolidatedFund

3,127
226
117
2
107
189.9
22

Source:SingaporeHDBandURA.*IncludingtheProfitfromLandSales.
**ExcludingtheProfitfromLandSales

revenues,requiringtransferpaymentsfromthecentraltreasurytomakeupthe
difference.ComparedtoHDB,URAsrevenueintakewasfairlymodestinFY
2005/2006,comingmainlyfrominvestmentinterests,carparkingfees,and
recoveryofdevelopmentcost.HoweverURAsprofitsfromlandsaleswere
enormous.Notevencountingthisincome,URAstillnettedasurplus.InFY
2005/2006,HDBwasadoneeagency,heavilyreliantongovernmentassistance
whileURAwasadonoragency,makingaSG$22millioncontributiontothe
governmentsconsolidatedfund.

OneofthemostimportantmissionsofbothHDBandURAisimplementingthe
GovernmentLandSales(GLS)programmes,inwhichdevelopmentsrightsofland
parcelsaresoldthroughpubicauctionsonthebasisofpropertytype,building
height,andplotratiorequirements.TheSG$3.127billionURAsecuredfrom
landsalesinFY2005/2006camefromsellingpropertydevelopmentrightsinthe
bustlingOrchardRoadcommercialdistrict.HDBusedtheprofit(SG$137
million)fromitslandsalestohelpcovertheoperatingdeficits,asshownin
Figure8.18.

142

AsSingaporeslandbrokers,HDBandURAhaveovertheyearsstrategically
soldlargeamountsofdevelopmentrightstoshapeSingaporesgrowthalong
railwaycorridorsandtoraisedevelopmentfunds.Sincetheearly1990s,thetwo
entitieshavereceivednearly$SG28.7billion(US$19.9billion)(Tables8.10and
8.11).WhileHDBhasleasedmainlyresidentiallandparcels,URAhasdeveloped
amixedportfolioofprojectsincludingcommercial,industrial,andresidential
uses.

Table8.10.GovernmentLandSalesawardedbyHDB(*ExceptAncillary
DevelopmentsandInterimUse;Feb.1990Oct.2007).Source:SingaporeHDB
SiteArea
#of
Lease
Price
LandUse
%
%
SG$M
sqm
Sites (No.Years)
Residential
4,346,353 92.5 10,603.7 78.5
103
99,103
Commercial
228,028
4.9 1,826.3 13.5
33
99
Mixed(Res.&Com.)
125,744
2.7 1,082.2
8.0
7
99
Total: 4,700,125 100.0 13,512.2 100.0
143

Table8.11.GovernmentLandSalesawardedbyURA(*VacantLandsOnly;
Feb.1993Oct.2007).Source:SingaporeURA
SiteArea
Price
#of
Lease
LandUse
%
%
sqm
SG$M
Sites (No.Years)
Business
73,505
1.6
22.9
0.2
3
30,60
Commercial
144,822
3.1 2,659.0 17.4
51
60,99
Industrial
2,180,679 46.1 2,119.5 13.9
36
30,60
Residential
1,695,402 35.8 10,117.9 66.4
380
99
HeavyVehiclePark
248,504
5.3
45.0
0.3
22
10,15,99
TransitionalOffice
10,444
0.2
37.0
0.2
1
15
White
132,322
2.8
0.1
0.0
13
99
Others
244,715
5.2
243.3
1.6
12 15,30,45,99
Total: 4,730,394 100.0 15,244.7 100.0
518

143

TemasekHoldingsandGovernmentLinkedCompanies

TemasekHoldingsisamegainvestmentcompanyownedbySingaporesMinistry
ofFinancethatmanagesaportfolioofoverSG$160billionacrossmajor
industries:bankingandfinancialservices;realestate;transportationand
logistics;infrastructure,telecommunicationsandmedia;bioscienceand
healthcare;education;consumerandlifestyle;engineeringandtechnology;and
energyandresources.Temaseksprimaryroleistoleverageprivateinvestments
inkeepingwiththenationsindustrialdevelopmentplan.Privatecompaniesfor
whichTemasakisamajorshareholderarecalledgovernmentlinkedcompanies
(GLCs).InadditiontoHDAandURA,Temasakownsconsiderablesharesinthe
SMRT.CapitaLand,MapletreeInvestments,andKeppelCorporationarekey
governmentlinkedcompaniesthatdevelopandmanagepropertyinconcert
withintermediateandlongtermplans(Table8.12).

Table8.12.KeyGovernmentlinkedCompaniesownedbyTemasekHoldings
inTransport,RealEstate,andInfrastructureIndustries
Source:TemasekReview2006

Company

SMRT
Corporation
CapitaLand
Mapletree
Investments

Keppel
Corporation

Temaseks
Share%

Industry

55

Transport

42

Property

100

Property

Revenue MarketCap.
FY2005
FY2005
SG$M
SG$M

673
1,397

3,846
13,369

161
2,244*

Property

10,850

31

*ShareholderEquity

144

5,688

Held
Since

1987
2000
2001

1975

8.5

TODCaseStudies

Thissectionbuildsupontheprevioussections,usingcasestudiestoprovide
insightsintopropertydevelopmentandtransitfinanceinthetwocomparative
Asiancityregions.First,experiencesinavarietyofsettingsarepresentedfor
greaterTokyo,followedbyexamplesofbothcentralcityandnewtown
developmentinSingapore.

Tokyo

CaseexamplesarepresentedbelowfortransitorienteddevelopmentsaroundJR
Eaststerminalstations,TokyuCorporationssuburbancorridors,andthe
recentlyopenedTskubaExpressline.Inaddition,evidenceonthelandvalue
benefitsofbeingclosetorailwaystationsinhighlycongestedTokyoispresented.

JREast

Sinceprivatizationin1987,JREasthasnotsoughttodevelophousingalongits
suburbancorridors.Instead,thecompanyhasfocusedoncommercialretail
projects.Oneinitiative,calledStationRenaissance,concentratesonsmall
convenienceretailfacilitiesinstations.JREasthasdevelopedamicropayment
mediabusinessaSmartCardcalledSUICAthatcanbeusedforconsumer
purchasesandfarepayments,placingvendingmachinesinitsstationsto
produceadditionalincome.IncentralTokyo,JREasthasinstalledStation
Renaissanceat11busyterminalstationswithatotalof26,350sqmofretailspace
(Figure8.19).JREastOmiyastation,forinstance,hasabout600,000passengers
passingthroughitperdayandaveraged27millionyen(US$240,000)indaily
retailsalesinFY2005.

JREasthasalsopursuedlargescalestationredevelopmentprojectsatthreekey
terminalstationsShinjuku,Shinagawa,andTokyoinclosecoordinationwith
thenationalandTokyometropolitangovernments.TokyoStationCityhas
becomeashowcaseterminalorientedprojectjointlydevelopedbyJREastand
privateinterestsfeaturinghighriseoffices,retailshopping,andhotels(Figure
8.20).Tokyostationiswellsuitedforlargescaleredevelopmentowingtolarge
amountsofbuildablespaceabovedepotsaswellashighpedestriantraffic
volumes.Onatypicalweekdayin2005,aroundahalfmillionpassengerspassed
throughTokyostationeachday.

145


Open
Year
2002
2005
2005
2005
2006
2007
2007
2008
2008
2008
2007

Station
Ueno
Omiya
NishiFunabashi
Shinagawa
Koenji
Tachikawa
Tokyo
Tabata
Mitaka
Nippori
Ofuna
Total

StoreArea
sqm
5,900
4,900
2,100
1,600
450
4,100
1,500
1,800
1,500
800
1,700
26,350

Figure8.19.JREastStationRenaissanceProjectsinTokyo.
Source:JREastFactSheet2007

TokyoMetro

Whenprivatized,TokyoMetrowasnotauthorizedtopursueproperty
developmenthoweverinyearstheserestrictionshavebeenrelaxed.Today,
TokyoMetrosmanagersrecognizethevalueofseveralstrategicallysitedland
parcels(formerlyownedbynationalgovernmentinthecenterofTokyo).Still,
propertydevelopmentremainsmostlyasidelineactivityofthecompany,
resultinginapiecemealapproachtoleveragingpropertyassets.TokyoMetro
hastodatepursuedonlysmallscalecommercialorresidentialproperty
developmentsinthecoreareaandnotallpropertieshavedirectaccessto
subwaystations(Table8.13).OnerecentprojectofnoteistheOmotesando
Echikastationwherethreesubwaylinesconverge:a4billionyen(US$35.8
million)stationrenewalprojectwith27retailstoreconcessionscovering1,300
grosssquaremeters(Figure8.21).Inreturnforusingundergroundspace,Tokyo
MetrohastopayspacerightstoTokyoMetropolitanGovernmentsRoadBureau.

146

SapiaTower

GranTokyoNorthTower
GranTokyoSouthTower

GranRoof
GranSta

TokyoStationCity

Development

GranTokyo
NorthTower

GranTokyo
SouthTower

GranRoof

SapiaTower

GranSta
(*Station
Renaissance)

PlotRatio/SiteArea/
GFA/Storeys
8.73
19,670sqm
171,770sqm
43
26.80
5,230sqm
140,168sqm
42

2,000sqm

117,310sqm
78,279sqm
35

4,500sqm
1,500sqm

Office Parking
lots
Leasing
GFA%
36.7
120

54.9

0.0

JointDevelopers/
YearofOpening
MitsuiRealEstateCorpora
tion;CelestineHotel
/20072012

280

Kashima;NipponOil
Corporation
/2007

50

/2013

39.5

155
/2007

0.0

0
/2007

Figure8.20.JREastsLargeScaleJointDevelopment:TokyoStationCity
Source:JREastFactSheet2007,MitsuiRealEstateCorporationGranTokyoNorthTower
website,andJREastBuildingLtd.website.

147

Table8.13.TokyoMetrosPropertiesinFY2006(Source:TokyoMetro)
PropertyType
TotalGFAsqm
%
#ofProperties
Office
39,118
41.1
10
Hotel
7,581
8.0
2
Residential
12,146
12.8
14
CommercialBuilding
23,560
24.8
3
CommercialSpace
5,302
5.6
7
CommercialSpace(UnderBridge)
7,459
7.8
6
Total
95,166 100.0
42

Hanzomon Line

Ginza Line

Chiyoda Line

Figure8.21.TokyoMetrosOmotesandoStationEchikaProject(Source:Tokyo
Metrowebsite).

TokyuCorporation

TokyuCorporationhasalonghistoryofcodevelopingGardenCitynewtowns
andrailwaylines.Thismainlyinthe1950sandearly1960s,predatingrailway
servicesthatwerebuiltbetween1966and1984.Railwayconstructioncostwas
financedhalfbycommercialloansandhalfbytheDevelopmentBankofJapan,
withproceedsfromlandsalesusedtopayoffloans.Gainsinlandvaluesfrom
thetimepropertieswereinagriculturalusetowhentheywereservedby
railwaysgeneratedtheprofitsneededtopayoffcommercialloans.

148

ParticularlyimportanttoTokyuCorporationsdevelopmentprocesshasbeenthe
practiceoflandreadjustment,usedtoassembleparcelsandfinanceancillary
infrastructure.Underthissystem,landholders(mainlyfarmers)gaveuptheir
propertiesandreceivedbackparcelsofroughlyhalfthesizebutthatenjoyedfull
services(e.g.,roads,pipedwater,electricity).Remaininglandwentnotonlyto
accommodateroadsandpublicspaceslikeparksbutwasalsosoldtocover
developmentcosts.Tokyusapproachiswidelyviewedasthemostsuccessful
exampleofvaluecapturepracticedbyJapaneserailwaycompanies.

Atpresent,Tokyus489sqkmbusinessterritorystretchesovergreaterTokyos
southwestquadrant,anareaof4.86millioninhabitants,2.33millionhouseholds,
and17municipalitiesandwards.Withinthisterritory,TokyuCorporations
mostwidelyheraldedgardencity,TamaPlaza,spans15sqkmsome15to35km
southwestofcentralTokyoandishometo580,000residents(Figure8.22).

RailwaycompanieslikeTokyuCorporationhaveovertheyearscapturedvalue
fromrailwayinvestmentsbecausehealthyratesofeconomicgrowthcombined
withworseningtrafficcongestionguaranteedhandsomeprofits.Howeverthis
haschangedinthewakeofstagnantpopulationgrowthandaslowingofthe
economyoverthepasttwodecades.Tospreadrisks,inrecenttimesprivaterail
waycompanieshavepartneredwiththirdpartiesinpursuinglargescale
developmentprojects.Forinstance,recentdevelopmentsofTokyuCorporation
haveinvolvedRealEstateInvestmentTrust(REIT)funding.

EntireTerritory
Area

489sqkm

Population

4.86million

Household

2.33million

Cities/Wards

17

TamaGardenCity
Area
Population

50sqkm
580,000

Figure8.22.TokyuCorporationsBusinessTerritoryandTamaGardenCity
(Source:TokyuCorporationReferenceDataNovember2006)

149

Besidesariskierdevelopmentclimate,privaterailwaycompaniesarefacing
increasinglocaloppositiontodensifyingneighborhoods.NIMBYism(NotinMy
BackYard)haspromptedTokyuCorporationtoadoptaninclusionaryapproach
todevelopment,matchinghardwaredesignofstationareaswithsoftware
planningstrategies,includingactivitycitizensparticipation.TokyuCorporation
callsthisthePEAstrategy,asdiagrammedinFigure8.23.Accordingtothis
fourprongapproach:(i)eachstationdevelopmentshouldbeadaptedand
uniquelydevelopedtoeachlocalcommunity;(ii)stationdevelopmentsshould
yieldwideregionalbenefitslikeimprovedairquality;(iii)mutualcoordination
andcooperationamongstakeholdersshouldbepursued;and(iv)station
developmentsshouldbeplannedandimplementednotjustasoneindependent
projectbutratherasapartofanentirecorridor.

Inrecentyears,severalnotabletransitorientedredevelopmentshaveoccurred
alongtheTokyuGardenCityrailwaycorridor.Table8.14highlightsthefive
largestprojectsintermsofplotratios,landusemixes,andotherdevelopment
features.MarkCityatShibuyastationandCarrotToweratShangenjayastation
aretwohighraiseofficeprojectsnearthecenterofTokyoinShibuyaYamanote
strategicarea.Futagotamagawastationredevelopmentisconceivedasmidrise
office,shopping,andresidentialdevelopment.TamaPlazaTerraceatTama
PlazastationandGrandberryMallatMinamimachidastationaremidandlow
riseshoppingmallsintheGardenCitystrategicarea,withafocuson
environmentalquality.GrandberryMallwasdesignedusingtheAmerican
modelofautoorientedbigboxretailandamplecarparking,situatednearthe
Minamimachidastationandahighwayinterchange.

150

PEAsStrategy

4StrategicAreas

DemographicTrend
TargetFunction
ShibuyaYamanoteArea
WellBalanced
BrandingImageCenter
GardenCityArea
Growing&Aging
AttractiveLiving
ToyokoArea
SlowlyAging
SubCenter
IkegamiTamagawaArea
Shrinking&Aging
CommunityService

Figure8.23.TokyuCorporationsPEAsStrategyand4StrategicAreas
(Source:TokyuCorporationReferenceDataNovember2006)

151

Table8.14.TokyuCorporationsFiveRecentTransitOrientedDevelopment(TOD)ProjectsontheGardenCityLine
Corridor(Source:TokyuCorporation)
Shibuya
MarkCity*

Sangenjaya
CarrotTower

Futagotamagawa
TamaPlaza
EastDistrictRedevelopment TamaPlazaTerrace
3.3
9.4

Minamimachida
GrandberryMall
17.1

29.2

9.68

8.42

Site Area=1.44ha

SiteArea sqm
14,420
TotalGFAsqm
139,521
ResidentialGFA%

CommercialGFA%
Some
OfficeGFA%
67.1
HotelGFA%
32.9
OthersGFA%

ParkingLots
454
ConstructionCost**
16.0billionyen
OpenYear
2000
DailyAve.Pax.***
FY05
631,481
%SinceFY00
7.8
*JointDevelopmentwithKeioandTokyoMetro
**TokyuCorporationOnly
***GardenCityLineOnly

5.91

GFA=26.61ha

Site Area=4.50ha

Site Area=0.92ha

0.83

3.51
Plot Ratio=3.51

GFA=7.70ha
Plot Ratio=8.42

Plot Ratio=9.68

GFA=13.95ha

Plot Ratio=5.91

PlotRatio

Plot Ratio=0.83

Station
Project
DistancefromTokyokm
Image

GFA=17.90ha

Site Area=5.10ha

GFA=7.24ha

Site Area=8.70ha

9,149
77,000

Some
Main

564
6.0billionyen
1996

45,020
266,100
43.7
30.1
11.0
0.0
15.1
NA
NA
2009

51,000
179,000
0.0
65.4
0.0
0.0
34.6
1,500
NA
20072010

87,000
72,400

Main

Some
1,657
7.2billionyen
20002007

113,799
3.6

66,059
9.4

64,238
1.2

27,970
43.5

152

TsukubaExpress

WhilemostprivaterailwayinvestmentsingreaterTokyohavebeeninthe
southwesternsuburbs,thelatestsuburbancommuterline,TsukubaExpress(TX),
liesintheoppositequadrant,inthenortheast(Figure8.24).Openedin2005,the
58.3km,20stationcorridorconnectstheYamanoteLoopAkihabarastationand
TsukubaScienceCity,servingtheTokyo,Saitama,Chiba,andIbaragiprefectures.
TsukubaExpresscost949.4billionyen(US$8.5billion)tobuild,financedas
follows:80%fromnointerestgovernmentloans,14%fromlocalgovernments
contributions,and6%fromloansfromtheNationalTrustFunds(Zaito).

Landreadjustmentwasusedtoassembleconsiderableamountsofrightofway
toaccommodateandfinanceTsukubaExpress.Incontrasttoprivaterailway
developmentofthepast,TXslandreadjustmentprojectshavebeen
implementedbypublicentities(includingtheUrbanRenaissanceAgency,Tokyo
MetropolitanGovernment,prefectures,andmunicipalities).Thesepublic
entitiesassembledandconsolidatedland,returningportionstotheoriginal
ownersandsellingmuchoftheremaindertotheJapanRailwayConstruction
Agencyatbase(prerailway)price(Figure8.25).AfterJRCAcompleted

Tsukuba
Ibaragi

Metropolitan
Government
/Prefectures
Tokyo
Saitama
Chiba
Ibaragi

Total

Saitama

Open

TX

Railway
Investment
BillionYen
Ave.Daily
Ridership

Chiba
Akihabara
Tokyo
Yamanote
Loop

Planning Area
Intensive Area

Projected
Land
Developments

Length
#of
km Station
13.2
7.4
13.5
24.2

7
2
5
6

58.3

20

August,2005
940.4
195,300(FY06)
150,700(FY05)
18Districts
2,900ha

Figure8.24.NewTsukubaExpressCorridorintheNortheastpartofTokyo

153


A).Stages

B).Methods

1st Stage
RightofWay

Before

LandReadjustment
ProjectArea

After

A
B

AcquiredLand

ForSale

Park

2nd. Stage
RightofWay

AsOriginalLand

Readjustment

AdjustedLand

Investment
Compensations
Public Uses
Public Uses

ReducedLand
Sale

Public Budget

3rd. Stage
NewStation
CommercialUse
Park
ResidentialUse

Figure8.25.LandReadjustmentStagesandMethodsused
intheTsukubaExpressCorridor.Source:ChibaPrefecture

construction,ownershipofTXwastransferredtoanewquasiprivaterailway
company.

InChibaprefecture,sixlandreadjustmentprojectswereimplementedto
accommodateTX,spanning1,081hectaresinsize.About40%oftheoriginal
landwasconvertedtorightofwayforTXandotherpublicuses(likeroads),or
soldontheopenmarkettoraisepublicfunds.

OnenotablelandreadjustmentprojecthasoccurredneartheKashiwanoha
station30kmnortheastofTokyosAkihabarastation.There,apublicgolfcourse
wastakenovertoaccommodatetheTXlineandstationaswellasresidences,a
university,researchinstitutesandhightechparks,partofTXslargerscientific
corridorfromAkihabaratoTsukuba(Figure8.26).Theoriginalgolfcourse

154

Science Park

Technology Plaza

University Campus

Venture Plaza
Natural Pond

Public Plaza

Public Park

TX Station

University Public Health

Field Center
Land Re-Adjustment Project Area

LandUsePlan
PublicUses
Road
Park/Green
Water

SubTotal
Total

%
ResidentialUses
24.4
SingleDetached
3.8
Complex
3.9
HighRiseBuilding

32.1

%
21.1
1.3
18.1

40.5

OtherUses
Commercial
Industrial
Education
Public
RailwayFacility

%
7.7
11.6
2.8
4.5
0.8
27.4
273ha(100.0%)

Figure8.26.NorthCenterLandReAdjustmentProjectand
TXKashiwanohaStation.Source:ChibaPrefecture

owner,MitsuiRealEstateCorporation,convertedportionsofitslandholdings
intoamidriseresidentialtower(ParkCity)andshoppingmall(LaLaport)
(Figure8.27).Whileaprivatebusinessventure,MitsuiRealEstateCorporation
hasworkedcloselywithlocalgovernmentstopromotetransitorientednew
towndevelopment.

155

GFA=14.43ha

Site Area=2.90ha

LaLaport(ShoppingMall)
3.47
Plot Ratio=3.47

ParkCity(Residential)
4.98
Plot Ratio=4.98

Property
PlotRatio

GFA=14.45ha

Site Area=4.17ha
SiteAreasqm
28,983
41,654
TotalGFAsqm
144,341
144,517
ResidentialUnits
977

ParkingLots

2,400
OpenYear
2008
2006
Figure8.27.MitsuiRealEstateCorporationsResidential&
ShoppingMallDevelopmentandTXKashiwanohaStation.
Source:MitsuiRealEstateCorporation.

156

TokyosLandPricesacrossRailwayCorridors

Asahistoricallymonocentricmetropolis,residentiallandpricesfallsteadilywith
distancefromcentralTokyo.AsshowninFigure8.28,thispatternholdsforthe
regions15majorrailwaycorridors.WithinandalongtheYamanoteLoop,
residentialpricesaregenerallydoublewhattheyare1520kmfromthecenter.
Figure8.28furtherrevealsthatsuburbanhousingcostsconsiderablymorealong
privaterailwaycorridorstothesouth,notablyTokyu,Odakyu,andTokaido.
Since2000,however,thefigurealsorevealsthatresidentiallandpriceshave
fallenmostrapidlyawayfromthecenter,indicatingahigherpremiumbeing
placedoneaseofaccesstothecore.Indeed,theonlyareawhereresidentialland
hasgainedvaluesince2000iswithinandalongtheYamanoteLoop.Thispartly
explainswhyprivaterailwaycompaniesaswellasformerpublicentitieslikeJR
Eastaretodayconcentratingonredevelopingstrategicparcelsnearcentral
stationsandmajorterminals.Criticschargethatopeningnew,modernretail
outletsinandaroundstationssimplyredistributessalestransactionsand
seriouslyunderminesretailactivitiesawayfromstations.InOctober2007,
TokyoMetropolitanGovernmentlevieda2.2billionyen(US$197million)
propertytaxoncommercialbusinessesat83stationsintheTokyo23Wardin
ordertoincreasethecompetitivenessofretailerslocatedawayfromstations.

157

Legend:
ResidentialLandPricesin2006andDistancefromtheCenterofTokyo
byMajorRailwayCorridors

YamanoteLoop
Tokaido
TokyuToyoko

1,000,000

ResidentialLandPriceYenpersqm

South

TokyuDenentoshi
Odakyu

900,000

Keio
ChuohOume

800,000

SeibuShinjyuku

West

SeibuIkebukuro

700,000

TobuTojo

600,000

TouhokuTakasaki

North

TobuIsesaki

500,000

Joban

East

SobuKeisei

400,000

TX

300,000

Private

200,000

JR
Private&JR

100,000

QuasiPrivate
6570

7075

6570

7075

6065

5560

5055

4550

4045

3540

3035

2530

2025

1520

1015

510

05

DistanceKmfromtheCenter

ResidentialLandPriceChangesfrom2000to2006
20.0
10.0

6065

5560

5055

4550

4045

3540

3035

2530

2025

1520

1015

10.0

510

0.0
05

ResidentialLandPriceChange%

Center

KeikyuYokosuka

20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
DistanceKmfromtheCenter

Figure8.28.ResidentialLandPricePatternsfromtheCenterofTokyo
byMajorRailwayCorridors.Source:LandandRealPropertyinJapan,
MinistryofLand,InfrastructureandTransport

158

Singapore

InSingapore,densitybonuseshavebeenreliedupontopromotecompact
developmentaroundstations.Figure8.29showspropertieswithinMTRs
catchmenthaveenjoyedplotratiobonusesrangingfrom5to15percent.

Figure8.29.PlotRatioBonusonMRTStationAreaDevelopmentsinthe
MasterPlan2003.Source:URA,ThePlanningActMasterPlanWrittenStatement2003.
Criterion

%Increase
AboveBase
PlotRatio
MRTRadius

Lessthan50%ofthesite
iswithinthedemarcated
5
boundary

50%ormoreofthesiteis

withinthedemarcated
10
boundary

LandArea(sqm)

DowntownCore

3,000to5,500
5
5,501to8,000
10
8,001andAbove
15

Museum&Orchard

10,000to15,000
5
15,001to20,000
10
20,001andAbove
15

159

TheOrchardPlanningArea(oneofthe55planningareasinSingapore)hasbeen
recentlytargetedasanareaforaddinghousingandpublicamenitiesinhopesof
enliveningandincreasingsafetyinthearea.LocatedincentralSingapore,the
Orchardareahaslongbeenknownforitsvibrantmixofoffices,shops,
restaurants,andhotels.The1994OrchardPlanningReport,however,pointed
outshortcomingsincluding:(i)lackofliveinpopulation;(ii)automobile
encroachmentintopedestrianzones;and(iii)lackofwellplannedopenspaces
andpocketparks.

ThroughtheGovernmentLandSalesprogrammeofURA,theOrchardTurn
projectisnowtakingformnearandabovetheOrchardStation(Figure8.30).In
2005,theURAsold21,732sqmofdevelopmentrightsaboveandadjacenttothe
MRTOrchardstationforSG$1.38billion(US$959million)toagovernment
linkedrealestategroupcompany.The99yearleasesetspecificconditionson
landuses,permissibleheights,openspaceprovisions,andpedestriancirculation
planning.Thesuccessfultenders,CapitalandRetailSingaporeInvestmentsPte
LtdandGreswardPteLtd,formedanewjointcompanytobuildthehighprofile
mixeduseproject:IONOrchardandTheOrchardResidences(Figure8.31).

OutsideofcentralSingapore,similarapproachesarebeingusedtoleverageTOD
(Figure8.32).AttheoutlyingPunggolandBishanstations,landholdingsofthe
HousingandDevelopmentBoard(HDB)areslatedformodernresidential
development.PunggolisaninterchangestationforbothMRTandLRTlines,
servinglargescalehousingdevelopmentsinthePunggolPlanningArea.Bishan
isasubregionalcenterthatwillbecomeamajorinterchangestationwhenthe
newMRTCirclelineiscompletedin2011.Inabreakfromtradition,the
developmentofanewmixedusecenterattheSerangoonstation,alsoonthe
plannedCircleline,isbeingoverseenbytheLandTransportAauthority(LTA),
notHDBorURA.ThissignalsapossiblemovementofSingaporesmajor
transportationplanningauthorityintothelanddevelopmentbusinessalongthe
linespracticedtodaybyMTRCinHongKongandJREastinTokyo.

160

Map

DevelopmentFeatures

DevelopmentConditions
SiteAreasqm

ParcelA1
ParcelA2
18,649.7
3,082+
Proposed
Commercial development with an underground shopping
Development
mall (incorporating a pedestrian walkway under Paterson
Road)
MaximumPermissible ThetotalGFAforthedevelopmentshallnotexceed125,726sq
GFAsqm
m. At least 40% of the total GFA of the completed
development shall be for retail, food & beverage and/or
entertainmentuses(*PlotRatio=6.72).
MaximumBuilding
218mAMSL(AboveMeanSeaLevel)
Height
LeasePeriod
99years
ProjectCompletion
9years
Period
MinimumBidPrice
SG$600Million
SuccessfulTender
SG$1.38Billion
Price
SuccessfulTender
CapitalandRetailSingaporeInvestmentsPteLtd&
GreswardPteLtd
Figure8.30.OrchardTurnprojectatOrchardMRTStation,2005.

Source:SingaporeURA.

161


ConstructionCost$:
ProjectedGFAUses:

SG$478Million
IONOrchard(RetailSpace:7075%)
TheOrchardResidences(SuperLuxuryHomes:2530%)

Figure8.31.OrchardTurnMixedDevelopmentProjectSite.
Source:URA;CapitaLandandSunHungKaiProperties.

8.6Summary

HongKong,TokyoandSingaporehavemodernandextensiverailwaysystems,
thoughtheirapproachestostationareadevelopmentandtransitfinancehave
beenquitedifferent.Tokyohasalongtraditionofprivatecompaniesawarded
exclusivefranchisesforcodevelopingrailwaysandnewtowns.This,however,
occurredmainlyinthemiddlepartofthe20thcenturywhenfairlycheap
agriculturelandwasbeingconvertedtourbanusesthroughland
consolidation/readjustmentandhugewindfallprofitswerepossible.Asgreater
Tokyohasexpandedandlandpriceshavesharplyrisen,theresponsibilityfor
financingrailwaydevelopmenthasshiftedtothepublicsector.Atthesametime,
however,theprivatizationofformerstateownedrailwaycompanieshasledto
theformationofpublicprivatepartnershipsforredevelopingofficeand
commercialpropertiesaboveandnearterminalstations.Becauseproperty
developmenthasbecomemorecompetitiveandrisky,privaterailwayandreal
estatecompaniesarenowpartneringwithgovernmentalbodiestorebuildurban
districtsaroundmajorcentralcitystations.

Inrecentyears,bothTokyoandSingaporehaveincreasinglyreliedupon
governmentassistanceintheformofcashgrants,bonds,loancredits,andland

162

grantstoleveragestationareadevelopment.Singaporehasaggressively
developeditsworldclassrailwaynetworkusingtransferpaymentsfromthe
consolidatednationalaccount,fundedinpartthroughhighautomobilerelated
chargesandlandrelatedtaxes,fees,andsales.

SimilartoexperiencesinHongKong,overtimeTokyosprivatizedrailway
companieshaveunderstoodthestrategicimportanceofairrightsanddepot
spaceaboveandadjacenttorailwaystations,particularlyintheurbancore.
However,commercialredevelopmentaroundTokyoscentralterminalstations
hasbeenmotivatedmorebythepromiseofshorttermfinancialreturnsthan,as
isincreasinglythecaseinHongKong,bylongertermplacemakingobjectives.
RedevelopmentisalsooccurringaroundSingaporescentralMTRstations,
notablyintheOrchardRoadarea.InSingaporescase,railwayandpropertyco
developmentaregeneratinggoodeconomicreturns,howeverthroughthestrong
handofgovernmentregulation,highmotoringcharges,andvisionaryregional
masterplanning,theislandstateisalsofocusingonqualityofplaceand
neighborhoodinvestments.InSingapore,asinHongKong,placemakingis
viewedasanintegralpartofthelongertermeconomicdevelopmentstrategy.

ComparedtoHongKong,bothTokyoandSingaporehaveamorecomplex
institutionallandscapeofpublicandprivatepartnershipsforleveragingstation
areadevelopment,inparttospreadrisksbutalsotoensureclosegovernment
oversightinbuildingworldclasstransit.InSingaporescase,railwayand
propertydevelopmentareimplementedbydifferentgovernmentauthorities,all
financedthroughthelargesseofcentralgovernment.InTokyo,adozendifferent
companiesofferrailwayservicesandnotallhavepursuedlanddevelopment.

Bywayofsummary,Table8.15comparesapproachestopropertydevelopment,
railwayinvestments,andlandmanagementinHongKong,TokyoandSingapore.
Thedegreetowhichtheseexperiencesmightbeappliedtootherpartsofthe
world,notablyrapidlyurbanizingpartsofChina,aretakenupinthenext,
concludingchapter.

163

Figure8.32.MRTStationsandNewGovernmentLandSalesProgrammes
throughHDBandLTAinFY2007.Source:SingaporeHDBandLTA.
Station
MRT/LRTLine
(Open)

Punggol
NorthEast(2003)
PunggolLRT(2005)

Bishan
NorthSouth(1987)
Circle(20102011)

Serangoon
NorthEast(2003)
Circle(20102011)

PunggolField/PunggolRoad
Residential
2.27
3.0
620

BishanStreet14
Residential
1.20
4.9
535

SerangoonCentral
WhiteSite
2.50
3.5
280

49,000

November2007
HDB

November2007
HDB

December2007
LTA

PropertyLocation

PropertyName
PropertyType
SiteAreaha
PlotRatio
Estimated#of
HousingUnits
EstimatedCommercial
GFAsqm
LaunchDate
SalesAgency

164

Table8.15.ConceptualSummaryacrossHongKong,TokyoandSingapore
Tokyo
Domains
HongKong
Private

Property

Railway

Management
Development
Owner
Operation
Construction

Com
+MTRC

Owner
Assemble

Land
System
Market

Operation
&Finance
Features

Gov

Gov

Com
+RailCom

Com

Com
+GLCom+SOE

RailCom

RailCom
SOE

RailSOE

Rail GLCom
SOE

RailCom

RailCom

RailSOE

Gov

RailCom
RailCom
+Gov+SOE

RailCom

Gov+SOE

RailSOE

Gov+SOE

Gov

Gov

PubliclyOwned:
LandLeasing
Duopoly

Geography

Whole

TransportReturn%
RealEstateReturn%

155

MarketFreehold:
LandReadjustment

SuburbanCorridor

Direct
AuctionPremiums
OwnerBenefits
Concessions
Office/Commercial/
Residential

CrossSubsidization
fromAutomobile

No

Yes

Gov.
CapitalAssistance

LandGrant

CashGrant,Bond
CreditforLoan

PropertyTypes

PubliclyOwned:
LandLeasing

Competition

120
120
Direct
PropertySales
OwnerBenefits
Concessions
Office/Commercial/
Residential

ValueCapture
Methods

Singapore

SOE

Com
+RailCom

MTRC

Owner

FormerSOE

Duopoly
Center&
SuburbanCorridor
135160
140
Direct

OwnerBenefits
Concessions

Centeror
SuburbanCorridor
95

Indirect
LandSales
PropertyTaxes

110120

Indirect
AuctionPremiums
PropertyTaxes

Office/Commercial

Yes

No

Yes

*Com:Company/Gov:Government/GL:GovernmentLinked/SOE:StateOwnedEnterprise

165

Whole

LandGrant
CashGrant,Bond

References

HongKong
HongKongSAR.CensusandStatisticsDepartmentWebsite:
(http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/)

HongKongSAR.HongKongYearbook2005
(http://www.yearbook.gov.hk/2005/en/index.htm)

HongKongSAR.PlanningDepartmentWebsite:
(http://www.pland.gov.hk/)

Tokyo
Association of Japanese Private Railways.2005. TheDatabookoftheMajorPrivate
Railways.

Cervero, R. 1998. The Entrepreneurial Transit Metropolis: Tokyo, Japan. The

TransitMetropolis:AGlobalInquiryChapter7,pp181210.

ChibaPrefectureWebsite:(http://www.pref.chiba.jp/index.html)

Japan Overseas Rolling Stock Association. 2007. UrbanTransportationSystemsin

Japan.

JapanRailwayCorporationEast(JRE)Website:(http://www.jreast.co.jp/)

MitsuiRealEstateCorporationWebsite:(http://www.mitsuifudosan.co.jp/)

JapanNationalGovernment,theUrbanRenewalOfficeWebsite:
(http://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/tosisaisei/index.html)

KeioWebsite:(http://www.mir.co.jp/)

KeihinExpressRailwayWebsite:(http://www.keikyu.co.jp/index.shtml)

KeiseiRailway:(http://www.keisei.co.jp/)

MinistryofLand,InfrastructureandTransport,LandandRealPropertyinJapan
WebSite(http://tochi.mlit.go.jp/)

166


OdakyuCorporationWebsite:(http://www.odakyu.jp/)

SeibuRailwayCorporationWebsite:(http://www.seibugroup.co.jp/railways/)

SotetsuRailwayCorporation(http://www.sotetsu.co.jp/)

Study Group for Urban Railway Issue. 2006. Integration of Railway and Town
PlanningforestablishingHumanscaleSustainableSociety.

TobuRailwayCorporationWebsite:(http://www.tobu.co.jp/)

TokyoMetropolitanGovernment,StatisticsofTokyoWebsite:
(http://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.jp/)

Tokyo Metropolitan Government. 2001. Tokyos New Urban Planning Vision: The
CertainWaytoUrbanRenewal.

TokyoMetropolitanGovernment,TransportationBureauWebsite:
(http://www.kotsu.metro.tokyo.jp/)

TokyoMetropolitanGovernment,ConstructionBureauWebsite:
(http://www.kensetsu.metro.tokyo.jp/)

TokyoMetroWebsite:(http://www.tokyometro.jp/index.html)

TokyuCorporationWebsite:(http://www.tokyu.co.jp/)

TsukubaExpressWebsite:(http://www.mir.co.jp/)

Singapore
CapitaLandWebsite:(http://www.capitaland.com/)

Cervero,R.1998.TheMasterPlannedTransitMetropolis:Singapore.TheTransit
Metropolis:AGlobalInquiryChapter6,pp155180.

Lui, P.C. and Tan, T.S. 2001. Building Integrated LargeScale Urban
Infrastructures: Singapores Experience. Journal of Urban Technology, Volume8,
Number1,pp4968.

167

Phang,S.Y.2007.UrbanRailTransitPPPs:SurveyandRiskofRecentStrategies.
TransportPolicy,Volume14,pp214231.

SingaporeHousingandDevelopmentBoardWebsite:(http://www.hdb.gov.sg/)

Singapore Land Transport Authority.2006. Building The Best: Land Transport

SystemforSingaporeAnnualReport2005/2006.

Singapore Land Transport Authority. 2005. The Journey: Singapores Land

TransportStory.

SingaporeLandTransportAuthorityWebsite:
(http://www.lta.gov.sg/)

SingaporeUrbanRedevelopmentAuthority,OrchardPlanningReport1994

SingaporeUrbanRedevelopmentAuthorityWebsite:
(http://www.ura.gov.sg/index.html)

Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority Website. Concept Plan 2001

TowardsaThrivingWorldCityinthe21stCentury.
(http://www.ura.gov.sg/conceptplan2001/index.html)

SingaporeUrbanRedevelopmentAuthorityWebsite.MasterPlan2003
(http://www.ura.gov.sg/ppd/gazettedmp2003/indexfrontmp2003.htm)

SBSTransitWebsite:(http://www.sbstransit.com.sg/)

SMRTCorporationWebsite:(http://www.smrt.com.sg/)

StatisticsSingaporeWebsite:(http://www.singstat.gov.sg/)

SunHungKaiPropertiesWebsite:(http://www.shkp.com/)

TemasekHoldings2006.TemasekReview2006:ManagingforValue.

WhitePaper:AWorldClassLandTransportSystem.Cmd.1of1996.Presented
to Parliament by Command of The President of the Republic of Singapore
OrderedbyParliamenttolieupontheTable:2ndJanuary1996.

168

ChapterNine

LessonsandExtensions
9.1SummaryandInsights
HongKongsexperienceswiththeR+Pprogrammerevealsthattransitvalue
capture,firstintroducedintheUnitedStatesoveracenturyago,isstillaviable
modelnotonlyforsustainablefinancebutalsosustainableurbanism.MTRCis
abletooffershareholdersappreciablereturnsoninvestmentviaproperty
development,whichpresentlygeneratesoverhalfofthecompanysincome.
StreamsofincomefrompastR+Pprojectshelpfinancefuturerailwayextensions;
theseexpansionsinturnspawntheirownR+Pprojectsthatfinancecapital
investmentsevenfurtherdownstream.Railandpropertydevelopmenthas
createdavirtuouscycleofrailwaycapitalfinancingandahighlytransitoriented
builtform.

R+Pismorethananendproductofbrickandmortaratopsubwaystations.
Asimportantly,itisacarefullyconceivedprocessforplanning,supervising,
implementing,andmanagingstationareadevelopmentandtappingintothe
landpriceappreciationthatresults.MTRCsroleasthemasterplannerfrom
conceptualizingdevelopmentopportunitiestopostconstructionmanagementof
realestateprojectshasprovidedthekindofcontinuity,accountability,and
resourcefulnessthatappealstoinvestorsandtenantsandthusseedsthe
programmesfinancialsuccess.R+Phasalsocontributedtoachievinglarger
regionaldevelopmentobjectives,inparticularanecklaceofpearlsurbanform
thatisconducivetotransitusageandconserveslandresources.

AvarietyofR+PprojectsexistinHongKongtoday.Mostfocusonhousing
developmentthoughallhavesomedegreeofcommercialusesaswell.In
general,themoreaccessiblethelocationthatisservedbyMTRC,themorelikely
theR+Pprojectisahighriseandhighvaluedofficecommercialventureinthe
airrightsaboveanMTRstation.RecentgenerationR+Pprojectshaveplaceda
strongerpremiumonurbandesignandqualityofpedestrianenvironments.This
hasbeenthecasenotonlyforperipherallocationsonformerGreenfieldsites,
likeTungChung,butalsoredevelopmentsitesonformerbrownfields,like
TseungKwanO.Investinginimprovingthequalityofurbanspaceinand
aroundstationshasgenerallypaidoffintheformofridershipgainsandhigher
realestateprices.IthasalsopositivelycontributedtoHongKongsstandingin
theglobaleconomy,appealingtoamenityconsciousprofessionalworkersand

169

businessesthatdependupontheagglomerationbenefitsmadepossiblebyHong
Kongsworldclasstransitnetwork.

EmpiricalevidenceunderscoresthebenefitsconferredbydesigningR+Pprojects
accordingtoTODprinciples.Thedirectridershipmodelspresentedinthis
papersuggestthatallelsebeingequal,atransitorienteddesignaddsasmuchas
35,000additionalweekdaypassengers(travelinginbothdirections)tostations
withR+Pprojects.Thebiggestridershipbonuscomesfromtransitoriented
developmenttiedtolargescaleresidentialR+Pprojects.Landmarketsalso
capitalizethebenefitsofR+P.Housingpricepremiumsintherangeof5%to
17%werefoundforunitsbuiltusingtheR+Pmodel.IfR+Pprojectshad
distinctivelytransitorienteddesigns,thepremiumsexceed30%.Empirical
evidencethatshowssustainabletransitfinanceandsustainableurbanismare
reinforcingisgoodnewsforpolicymakers,realestatedevelopers,andsmart
growthadvocates.Withanincreasingdemandtolive,work,shop,andrun
businessesinhighqualitydistrictswellservedbypublictransport,tremendous
profitscanbegeneratedfromthecodevelopmentofrailwaysystemsandnew
realestateprojectsthatbenefitbothpublicandprivateinterestsawinwin
outcomethatliesatthecoreofallsuccessfulpublicprivatepartnerships.

WhencomparedwithapproachestotransitfinanceintwoothermajorAsian
cityregionswithworldclasstransitsystemsTokyoandSingaporeHong
KongsR+Pprogrammostdirectlyembracesbeneficiaryprinciplesoftransit
finance.Whileprivaterailwaycorporationsaggressivelypracticedvaluecapture
ingreaterTokyoduringmuchofthesecondhalfofthe20thcentury,inmore
recentyearslocalandnationalgovernmentgrantsandinterestfreeloanshave
beenreliedupontofinancenewrailwayextensions.Thisisdueinlargepartto
largermacroforcesthathaveincreasedtheriskofrailinvestmentsamong
privatecorporationsnotably,stagnantpopulationgrowthandincreasing
marketinterestincentralcityredevelopmentasopposedtooutlyingnewtowns.
Similarly,Singaporefinancesaconsiderableshareofitsfixedguidewaytransit
investmentsthroughthelargesseofthecentralgovernment.Withinthe
transportationsector,crosssubsidiesflowfrommotoriststopublictransport
interestsintheformofhighchargesforvehiclelicensingandregistration,
gasolinetaxes,anddrivingduringpeakperiods.UnlikeinHongKongand
Tokyo,railwayauthoritiesarenotactivelyinvolvedinSingaporesconstruction
ofTODprojects;rather,othergovernmentlanddevelopmentauthoritiestakeon
thisresponsibilityincollaborationwithprivaterealestatesyndicates.

NeitherTokyonorSingaporehasthekindofunifieddecisionmakingframework
170

foundunderR+P.Inbothplaces,thecoordinationofrailwayandland
developmentoccursinamorefragmented,piecemealfashion.HongKongs
relianceonasingleentity,MTRC,tooverseeandcoordinaterailwayplanning,
design,andpostconstructionactivitiesprovidesanunusualdegreeof
continuity,transparency,andaccountability.Itmostlikelyincreasesprofitsand
protectsassetsaswell.HavingasingleentitylikeMTRC,somemightcontend,
increasestheriskofanallpowerfulmonopolistcontrollingrailwayandland
development.HoweverownershipbythegovernmentofHongKongofmore
thanhalfofMTRCsequitysharespreventsthisfromoccurring,ensuringthat
thebroaderpublicinterestsareweighedinallinvestmentdecisions.

Bywayofsummary,severalkeylessonsfalloutofthisresearch:

Transitvaluecapture(e.g.,R+P)promotesbothfinancialandbroader
urbangrowthobjectiveswhenthe3Dmodel(density,diversity,and
design)iswellexecuted,creatingawinwinoutcomeforallparties
involved;

SocietalbenefitsofbuildingR+Pprojectsaccordingtotransitoriented
designprinciplesareexpressednotonlybyhighfinancialreturnsbutalso
healthyrealestatemarketsandaridershipbonus;

BothTODandtransitvaluecaptureworkbestwhenstrategicallyplanned
anddesignedatacorridorandregionallevel,asunderscoredby
experiencesinHongKong,Tokyo,andSingapore;and

Potentiallytremendousbenefitscanaccruefromextendingtransitvalue
capturemodels,likeR+P,tofastgrowingpartsoftheworld,particularly
thoseinAsia.

9.2ExtensionsoftheR+PModel

Assuggestedabove,thepotentialbenefitsofapplyingtheR+Pmodelelsewhere,
suchasinotherfastgrowingcitiesofAsia,arequitehigh.Onemightarguethat
HongKongrepresentsanextremecaseintermsofurbandensitiesandtraffic
congestion,andthatthepotentialreturnsfromtransitjointdevelopment
elsewherewillbefarmoremodest.However,manycoastalcitiesofmainland
ChinaarebeginningtomimicHongKongshighrisedevelopmentpatternand

171

todayareveritablebeehivesofindustrialexpansionandentrepreneurialism.
Worseningtrafficcongestionandairqualitycalloutforsustainablepatternsof
urbanization,onesthatrelyoninherentlythemostefficientformofmotorized
transportationmasstransit.

Chinasratesofurbanizationandtheprivateautomobiletravelthataccompanies
ithavebeenstaggering.Since1978whenChinascentralgovernmentintroduced
itsopendoorpolicyofeconomicform,urbanpopulationhasgrownfrom80
milliontomorethan560million,averaginganannualgrowthrateof7.5%(Lin,
2002;Zhang,2007).Vehicleownershiphasincreasedatmorethantwicethisrate
overthepastdecadeinmanybigcities.InShanghai,thenumberofregistered
privateautomobilesjumpedfrom200,000in1991to1.4millionin2002(Zhang,
2007).Suchswiftpaceofgrowthhasoverwhelmedroadwaynetworks.In
centralBeijing,theaveragetravelspeedplummetedfrom45kphin1994to12
kphin2003.Duringpeakhours,onefifthofBeijingsroadsandintersections
cometoastandstill,withtrafficspeedslessthan5kph.1Trafficsnarlshave
worsenedairquality.ArecentWorldBankstudyshowsthatofthe20most
severelypollutedcitiesintheworld,16arelocatedinChina.2Threatstoglobal
pollutionarecauseforalarm.Currently,theworldssecondlargestgreenhouse
gasemitter,ChinaisonapacetosurpasstheU.S.in2008(Fraker,2006).

Chinasleadersaretodayturningtorailwayinvestmentsinhopesofstemming
thethreatsposedbyrisingmotorization.Urbanrailsystemsarecurrentlyfound
in12mainlandChinesecities.3Planscallforexpandingandupgradingexisting
railsystemsandbuildingnewonesin15otherChinesecities.BusRapidTransit
(BRT)systemsarealsobeingbuiltorexpandedinBeijing,Tianjin,Chengdu,
Xian,andKunming.TianjinandDalianoperatetramsoncentralcitystreets.
Opportunitiesforcreatingsustainablecityformsthroughbundlingland
developmentandrailwayinvestmentsinlargeChinesecitiesarelargely
untappedandquitesubstantial.

MTRChasalreadyenteredthemainlandChinamarket,havingwonaconcession
tobuildLine4ofShenzensmetroraillinethrough2.9millionsquaremetersof
rail+propertydevelopment.Thecompanyhasalsobeeneyeingmarketsin
1

See: http://www.usc.cuhk.edu.hk/wk_wzdetails.asp?id=2906
See: http://www.economist.com/business/displayStor.cfm?story_id=3104453
3
Starting in the early 1990s, cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou built multiple
underground metro lines, with transit serving well over a million passenger trips per day in each
city. In more recent years, other large Chinese cities have followed suit, including Tianjin,
Nanjing, Shenzhen, Shenyang, Chengdu, Dalian, Harbin, Wuhan and Chongqing.
2

172

Beijing,Wuhan,Shanghai,Hangzhou,andTianjin.InaninterviewintheSouth
ChinaMorningPost,SirC.K.Chow,CEOofMTRC,wasaskedaboutthepotential
ofextendingtheR+PmodeltoChina.Heresponded:

Itstooearlytopredictwhetherrevenuefromoverseasoperation

willbebiggerthanHongKong.Weareonlyatthebeginningof

thejourneybutIthinkthepotentialinChinaismuchbiggerthan

thepotentialinHongKong,andMTRCisbestpositionedtotake

advantageofthat.4

ManyChinesecitiesareapproachingthesize(roughly5millioninhabitants)and
densitythresholds(15,000inhabitantspersquarekilometerintheurbancore)
oftenthoughtnecessarytojustifyhighcapacityrailwayinvestments(Cervero,
1998).Andmanyarebecomingmoreandmoreautomobileoriented.
Approximatelytwiceaslargeinpopulation,Beijinghas2.8millionregistered
vehiclescomparedtoHongKongs0.5million.

AfirststeptoadvancingmodelslikeR+Pistoelevatetheimportanceof
integratingpublictransportandurbandevelopmentmoregenerally.Toalarge
extent,therehasbeenadisconnectbetweenthetwo.Beijingcurrentlyoperates
fourrailtransitlines,withatotaltracklengthof114km.Beijingsrailtransit
expansionhasbeenaccompaniedbyarealestateboom.Yetthereisalackof
integratedplanninganddevelopment,althoughnewbuildingsmightbe
spatiallyproximatetorailstations.HousingprojectsfollowedBeijingsrail
transitnetworks,butjobsandservicehavenot(Zhang2007).Manynew
communitiesdevelopedalongrailcorridorshavebecomeveritablebedroom
communities.Skewedcommutingpatternshaveresulted.Astudyofthree
residentialnewtownsinBeijingsrailservednorthernsuburbsfoundasmanyas
ninetimesthenumberofrailpassengersheadinginboundinthemorningpeak
asheadingoutbound(LinandZhang,2004).Poorintegrationofstationdesigns
withsurroundingdevelopmenthasledtochaoticpedestriancirculationpatterns
andlongpassengerqueuesatsuburbanstationslikeXizhimenonBeijingsLine
2(Zhang,2007).

Theabsenceofstationareamasterplanninghasalsoledtosubstandard
development.AcaseinpointisBeijingsSihuiinterchangestationonLines1
and8betweenthe3rdand4thringroads.There,amassiveconcreteslabwasbuilt
T.Shukwa,MTRCorpChiefSteersCompanytoNewHighs.SouthChinaMorning
Post,December15,2006,p.S4.
4

173

overthe40hectaredepotsitenexttothestation,enablingtheBeijingCity
UndergroundRailwayCompanytolease700,000m2ofairrightstodevelopers.
Nodesignordevelopmentstandards,however,weresetaspartofthelease
agreement.Toeconomizeonthecostofathousandplusapartmentsbuiltatop
thesite,onlyonefootbridgewasbuilttotheSihuisubwaystation.
Overcrowdedsidewalksandqueuesatthestationentrancehaveseverely
detractedfromthestationenvironment,resultinginlandpricesthatarebelow
tractsfartherfromthestation.Thepoorqualityenvironmentsurroundingthe
Sihuistationunderscorestheimportanceofamasterplanningentitythat
overseesprojectdevelopmentandensuresafunctionalrelationshipunfolds
betweenthepublicandprivaterealmsofstationsettings.

Beijingsofficialsseemawareofpastshortcomingsandareseekingtochange
course.Inconcertwithmasterplanningforthe2008OlympicGamesand
beyond,Beijingsmunicipalgovernmentestablishedthefollowingtransportation
developmentguideline:

Thepublictransportationsystemwillalsobefullyexploitedasa
functionalinstrumentinguidingBeijingsurbandevelopment.Urbanland
developmentwithtransitorienteddevelopment(TOD)willbeemployed
torationalizeBeijingslayoutandprovidereliabletransportation
supportingfacilitiesforthedevelopmentofscatteredgroupsandsmall
townsinthesuburbs.5

AnimportantchallengeincitiesthesizeofBeijingistothinkofTODsasmore
thannodesinisolation.TODplanningandfinanceneedstobetiedtoalarger
regionalplan,onethatcastsTODsaspartofanetwork,whatsomehavecalled
transitorientedcorridors(TOCs)(Cervero,2007).Whenconceptualizedas
partofastrategicregionalplanningeffort,internationalexperiencesshowthat
anintegratednetworkofTOCscansumtoaTransitMetropolis,arguablythe
mostsustainablepatternofurbanizationinmegacitiesoftheworld(Cervero,
1998).

TheresearchpresentedinthisreportcouldbehelpfultoChineseplanners
seekingtoadvanceTODprinciples.Notably,thetypologyofR+Pprojects
presentedinChapterFourprovidesinsightsintothebuiltenvironment
attributesofvariousTODprototypes.The3Dsdensity(e.g.,plotratio),
http://www.ebeijing.gov.cn/Government/OlympicPlan/t1138.htm

174

diversity(e.g.,landusemix),anddesign(e.g.,skywalknetwork)ofMTRCs
R+Pprojectsvariedmarkedlyamongprototypes(e.g.,centralcityoffice
developmentsversusperipheralnewtownprojects).TODprototypesare
neededasChinesecitiesseektostrategicallydeveloptheirrailwaynetworksand
comprehensivelanduseplans.SuchprototypeswouldhelpmoveTODfroma
broadconcepttoanappliedmodelofurbanismbasedonvariousfunctionsof
stationsandscalesofdevelopmente.g.,TODsasnewtowns,interchange
stations,hightechemploymentnodes,urbanredevelopmentdistricts.

Clearly,experienceswithR+Pandotherapproachestotransitjointdevelopment
cannotbeappliedtoChinesecitiescarboncopylike.Hurdlesexist.
Governmentsownershipandcontroloflandisonepotentialstumblingblock.
Privatecompaniescannotownlandoutrightandnavigatingthroughthethicket
oflocalandcentralgovernmentbureaucraciesoverseeinglandrightsandprices
isfraughtwithrisksanduncertainties.Thetrendtowardsingleuse,master
plannedprojectswithrepetitivearchitectureonsuperblocksinsuburbansettings
couldalsoworkagainstTOD.SoistheemphasisonlacingChinesecitieswith
massivethoroughfaresandexpresswaysinanapparentattempttomimic
westernpatternsofinfrastructureandsuburbanization.Still,theprincipleof
valuecaptureisanideathatresonateswithmanyChineseofficials.Arecent
AsianDevelopmentBankreport(2005)suggestswidespreadinterestinthe
PeoplesRepublicofChinafortheadoptionofpublicprivatepartnershipsfor
urbanrail.AsrapidurbanizationcontinuestochokethestreetsofmanyChinese
citieswithtrafficandthreatensenvironmentalqualitylocallyandontheglobal
stage,itisimperativethatarguablythemostsustainableformofurbanismthe
linkageoflanduseandpublictransportbeaggressivelypursued.Hong
KongsR+Pmodel,webelieve,isthebesttemplateavailableforsustainably
financingtransitandbuildingcities.

Certainlyelementsoftransit/landusepolicyfromthecasecomparisoncities
reviewedinthisreportTokyoandSingaporealsohaveapplicabilityto
rapidlydevelopingpartsoftheworldlikeChina.Singaporesapproachesto
transportationdemandmanagement,suchasdynamicroadpricing,clearly
reinforcesinitiativestopromotetransitorienteddevelopment,whetherdone
throughtheR+Pmodeloranyotherapproach.Recentexperienceswith
terminalstationredevelopmentprojectsinTokyosimilarlyhavepotentialfor
majorintermodalfacilitiesinlargeChinesecities.However,noapproachto
transitfinancehasasbigofapotentialpayoffforrapidlygrowingcitiesofChina
andthedevelopingworldthanR+P.Owingtotheinherentefficienciesof
beneficiaryfinancingandthepotentialtocreateavirtuouscycleofrailinduced
175

financialgainsandhighqualityurbandevelopmentofferstremendous
opportunitiestoplacefastgrowingcitiesonamoresustainablepathwayin
termsofbothrailwayfinanceandcitydesign.

References

AsianDevelopmentBank.2005.AsianDevelopmentOutlook2005.HongKong:
AsianDevelopmentBank.

Cervero,R.1998.TheTransitMetropolis:AGlobalInquiry.Washington,D.C.:
IslandPress.

Cervero,R.2007.TransitOrientedCorridors.TheTransportation/LandUse
Connection,T.Moore,P.Thornes,B.Appleyard.Chicago:PlanningAdvisory
ServiceReportNumber546/547,pp.136137.

Lin,G.C.2002.TheGrowthandStructuralChangeofChineseCities:A
ContextualandGeographicAnalysis.Cities,Vol.19,No.5,pp.299316.

Lin,J.andZhang,Y.2004.AnalysisofPassengerVolumeEffectofLandUse
alongUrbanRailTransit.TransportForum,Vol.25,pp.5457.

Zhang,M.2007.TheChineseEditionofTransitOrientedDevelopment.
TransportationResearchRecord,forthcoming.

176

Appendix1
DendogramTreeDiagram

Group1

Group2

Group3

Group4

Group5

FigureA1.1.R+PTypologybasedonBuiltEnvironmentVariables

A1-1

Pattern5:PredominantlySubsidized,SmallScale,
Donut PatternHousing:

Pattern4:Mixed,LargeScale,EvenlySpreadHousing

Pattern1:Private,SmallScale,Donut PatternHousing

Pattern2:PredominantlyPrivate,LargeScale,
EvenlySpreadHousing

Pattern6:PredominantlyPublic,LargeScale,
NearStationHousing
Pattern3:PredominantlyPrivate,
SmallScale,CoreHousing

FigureA1.2.TypologyofHousingDevelopmentsaroundMTRStations

A1-2

Appendix2
QualityofCatchmentArea
FiveR+PCases

A2.1Admiralty(HO)
Admiralty

3
T
1

Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA2.1.1.Admiralty(HO)CatchmentAreaMap

A2- 1

OfficeBuildingsonMTR

ShoppingMallaboveMTR

PTIattheGroundLevel

IntegratedEntry/Exit

PublicSignageSystem

FootbridgetoCiticTower

GreenPocket

FootbridgeNetwork

FootbridgetoGov.Office

FigureA2.1.2.Admiralty(HO)CatchmentAreaPhotos

A2- 2

TableA2.1.1.Admiralty(HO)CaseSummarySheet
LocationMap

Site Map

R+PLandUse
Office93,117sqm(83.5%)
Commercial18,114sqm(16.2%)
Others286sqm(0.3%)
Parking0lots

Open:1980

16.2
%

%
0.3
%

83.5
%

Plot Ratio=15.95

0.70ha

GFA=11.16ha

MixedIndex=0.29

Site Area=0.70ha
RidershipPerformancein2005
WeeklyPax792,249(1.1%upsince01)
WeekdayWeekendBalance1.91
WeekdayAMPeakBalance0.30
WeekdayPMPeakBalance0.62
WeekdayAMPMPeakBalance1.02
TravelTimetoCentral..2minutes

HousingPatternin2001
HousingUnitswithin500m..3,422units
SpatialPattern
500200m87.1%
2000m12.9%
PrivateHousingShare..100.0%

A2- 3

TableA2.1.2.Admiralty(HO)SurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination
WalkingDistance
m
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

May14,2007/5::00pm
1
2
CiticTower
Mall&Office
400
1050
(Vertical)
350
1050
(Vertical)
10
2
95

RoofedBridge

100

Building

#:UpDown
Mechanized?

Yes
400

Vertical

Yes
400

Design&Amenity

0
1

Private
SmallPlant

Many

0
Many

Private
RetailActivities

Sidewalk
Type

Footbridge

Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#
Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement
Signage#&Type

3
GovernmentOffice
400

T
PTI
10

350

10

10

100
100

Shelter Bridge & Building

Buildings
2
1

Yes
Yes
400600
400

Many

Public&Private
Functional

Building

Many

Many
Many

Public&Private
NewBuilding
Interior/Spacious
Building&Shelter
Bridge

Full

Full

Full

Full

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

LongFootbridge,
Greenpocket

Oneofthe
integratedfour
buildings

Abigfootbridgeto
thePacificPlace
overQueensway

Integratedwith
MTRstation

A2- 4

Normal&Building

A2.2TinHau(HR)
Tin Hau
Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA2.2.1.TinHau(HR)CatchmentAreaMap

A2- 5

ResidentialToweronMTR

ExitA1

PTIattheGroundLevel

PublicSignageSystem

IntegratedBigParking

ExitB

Green Pocket near Exit A1, SidewalktoPublicLibrary

A2

OldRetailStreet

FigureA2.2.2.TinHau(HR)CatchmentAreaPhotos

A2- 6

TableA2.2.1.TinHau(HR)CaseSummarySheet
LocationMap

SiteMap

0.58ha

R+PLandUse

22.7
%

Plot Ratio=14.43

Residential61,000sqm(72.9%)
Commercial3,700sqm(4.4%)
Others19,000sqm(22.7%)
Parking650lots

Open:1989

4.4
%
72.9
%
MixedIndex=0.44

GFA=8.37ha

Site Area=0.58ha

RidershipPerformancein2005

HousingPatternin2001

WeeklyPax232,369(14.1%upsince01)
WeekdayWeekendBalance1.57
WeekdayAMPeakBalance0.97
WeekdayPMPeakBalance0.92
WeekdayAMPMPeakBalance0.98
TravelTimetoCentral8minutes

HousingUnitswithin500m13,137units
SpatialPattern
500200m57.5%
20080m28.6%
800m13.9%
PrivateHousingShare79.6%

A2- 7

TableA2.2.2.TinHau(HR)SurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

WalkingDistance
m
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType
#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
cm
#:Retails
Advertisement
Signage#&Type

Design
Amenity

May14,2007/4:35pm
1
2
Residential
PublicLibrary
Area

5
350

3
Park

20

300

15

4
RetailStreet

500

400

0.5

0.5

0%

Open
1

Yes
300500

20%

RoofedBridge
1

Yes
250

0%

Open
0

0%

Open
0

0%

Open
0

250

200

250

Many

Public
& Plants & Open Trees,Green
Space
,&Wellpaved

Sidewalk
Type

Normal

Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#

Yes

Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

Normal
&
Footbridge
Yes
1

30s

Integrated
Largepark
with MTR, but
Not
direct
connection

A2- 8

Public
OldNoisy
Street

T
PTI

10

10

Plants & Open

Space

Normal

Functionally
Well
Integrated
Normal

Almost

Notclearly

Yes

30s

2min

NexttoMTR

OldStreet

Integratedwith
MTR

A2.3HangHau(MR)

Hang Hau

2
1

3
4

Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA2.3.1.HangHau(MR)CatchmentAreaMap

A2- 9

MTR and R+P Residential Integrated R+P Residential IntegratedEntrance

Area
Area

Entrance and Security Check OpenSpaceandClubHouse ClubHouse

Point

ClubHouseOpenSpace

ClubHouseChildcareSpace Footbridge

PrivateSignageSystem

Walkway passing through Public Housing Open

Space
RetailBuildings

PublicHousing

PublicHousingRetailMall

A2-10

TKOHospital


Town Square and Integrated PTIinside
pointfromoutside

PTIoutside

FigureA2.3.2.HangHau(MR)CatchmentAreaPhotos

A2-11

TableA2.3.1.HangHau(MR)CaseSummarySheet
LocationMap

SiteMap

R+PLandUse
Residential 138,652sqm(97.5%)
Commercial 3,500sqm(2.5%)
Parking 369lots

2.5
%

Open: 2005

97.5
%
Mixed Index = 0.07

Plot Ratio=7.90

1.80ha

GFA=14.22ha

Site Area=1.80ha

RidershipPerformancein2005

HousingPatternin2001

Weekly Pax 635,156 (100%up since 01)

Weekday-Weekend Balance 1.42
Weekday AM Peak Balance 0.39
Weekday PM Peak Balance 0.62
Weekday AM-PM Peak Balance 1.31
Travel Time to Central 26minutes

Housing Units within 500m 31,196units

Spatial Pattern
500-200m 31.1%
200-80m 55.6%
80-0m 13.3%
Private Housing Share 20.6%

A2-12

TableA2.3.2.HangHauSurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

May16,2007/2:00pm
1
2
TKOHospital
Public

Housing

(HauTak)

WalkingDistance
m

500

150

LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

400

100

3
4
EastPointCity Residential
(Mall)
OasisR+P
withClub
House
10
10

10
10

10

0.5

0.5

0.5

60

Building
1

Yes
300500

100

Building
0

100

Building
0

300500

300500

100

Integrated
1

Yes
400

100

Integrated
1

Yes
400

Many

Many

Many

Many

Private
Retail
Activities

Private
Retail
Activities

AFew

Private
HighEnd
Comfortable
Space

Building&
Normal

Full

Sheltered
Footbridge

Full

Direct

Direct

Full

Full

30s

TheRegional
Hospitalis
locatedfarfrom
station

Pedestrians
passthrough
theretail
center

Pedestrians
directlyenter
theretail
center

Residential
areais
integrated
withMTR
station

Integrated
withMTR
station

#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement
Signage#&Type

Design
Amenity

Sidewalk
Type
Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#

Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

Many

Private
& Retail
Activities
& Public Open
Space
Building
&
Normal

AlmostFull

A2-13

T
PTI

10

10

Integrated and
Functional

A2.4TungChung(LR)
Tung Chung
Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA2.4.1.TungChung(LR)CatchmentAreaMap

A2-14

ResidentialArea

TownSquare

Inside Shopping Mall (Up & BigFootbridgewithRetails

Down)

Shopping Mall and MTR

(Nighttime)

PrivateSignageSystem

Footbridge Network to the FootbridgetotheResidential Outside of the R+P area

ResidentialArea(Nighttime) Area(Nighttime)
(Nighttime)

FigureA2.4.2.TungChung(LR)CatchmentAreaPhotos

A2-15

TableA2.4.1.TungChung(LR)CaseSummarySheet
LocationMap

SiteMap

R+PLandUse
Residential935,910sqm(90.8%)
Office14,999sqm(1.5%)
Commercial55,862sqm(5.4%)
Hotel22,000sqm(2.1%)
Others2,063sqm(0.2%)
Parking..3,869lots

Open:1998

1.5 5.4 2.1

% % %

90.8
%

Plot Ratio=4.76

21.70ha

MixedIndex=0.25

GFA=103.08ha
Site Area=21.70ha

RidershipPerformancein2005

HousingPatternin2001

Weekly Pax359,123 (39.3%up since

01)
WeekdayWeekendBalance1.48
WeekdayAMPeakBalance0.75
WeekdayPMPeakBalance0.91
Weekday AMPM Peak Balance 1.32

TravelTimetoCentral35minutes

HousingUnitswithin500m5,815units
SpatialPattern
500200m0.00%
20080m0.00%
800m100.00%
PrivateHousingShare26.7%
*2001CensusDatadoesnotcapturetheR+Pdevelopments.

A2-16

TableA2.4.2.TungChungSurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

WalkingDistance
m
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

May16,2007/2:00pm
1
2
ResidentialArea
ShoppingMall
(Coastal
Skyline)
400
20

3
CableCarStation

T
PTI

200

15

350

20

150

15

100

Bridge
2

Yes
4002000

50

Building
1

Yes
TownSquare

Building
23

Yes
5002000

TownSquare

Many

Yes
Signage#&Type Many

MTR,Private
Design
& Commercial
Amenity
Activities,Spacious

Public
VerySpacious

MTR
Well
Designed
TownSquare

Sidewalk
Type

MTR
Through
well
designed
Town
Square
and TownSquare

Direct

Full

TownSquareand
Normal

Full

0
0

0
0

0
0

AcrosstheTown
Square

AcrosstheTown
Square

#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement

Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#
Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

Building
Bridge

Full
0
0

VerySpacious
AcrosstheTown
BridgewithRetails, Square
Safeduringnight
hours

A2-17

Full

A2.5HongKong(LM)
Hong Kong

4
3

2
5
T
6

Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA2.5.1.HongKong(LM)CatchmentAreaMap

A2-18

1IFC, 2IFC and the Four Underground

Transfer UndergroundArtSpace
SeasonHotel
Corridorto/fromCentral

AirportCheckinCounter
Airport Line Gate (multiple Taxi Lines in front of the
layers)
AirportGate

Functional Signage System PTIattheGroundLevel

attheGroundLevel

A2-19

VerticalMovement

Shopping Corridor at the Footbridge to/from the Ferry Open View at the Second
SecondFloorLevel
FloorLevel
Piers

IntegratedHotel

HighEndRetailstotheHotel Pedestrian Deck from MTR

(Inside)
tothePrivateProperties

Bridge Connections at the Footbridge Network around Public Open Space (POS) on
SecondFloorLevel
theRoof
MTR

FigureA2.5.2.HongKong(LM)CatchmentAreaPhotos

A2-20

TableA2.5.1.HongKong(LM)CaseSummarySheet
LocationMap

SiteMap

R+PLandUse
Office254,186sqm(61.1%)
Commercial59,458sqm(14.3%)
Hotel102,250ha(24.6%)
Parking1,344lots

Open:1998

24.6
%
61.1
%

14.3
%

Plot Ratio=7.28

5.71ha

GFA
=41.59 ha

Site Area=5.71ha
MixedIndex=0.57

RidershipPerformancein2005

HousingPatternin2001

WeeklyPax467,720(34.5%upsince01)
WeekdayWeekendBalance1.83
WeekdayAMPeakBalance0.50
WeekdayPMPeakBalance0.55
WeekdayAMPMPeakBalance1.15
TravelTimetoCentral8minutes

HousingUnitswithin500m2,707units
SpatialPattern
500200m53.5%
2000m46.5%
PrivateHousingShare..100.0%

A2-21

TableA2.5.2.HongKongSurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

Walking
Distancem
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement
Signage#&Type

May16,2007/4:00pm
1
2
Central
IFC
Station
Shopping&

Office
300
30

3
Four
Season
Hotel
100

4
FerryPiers

250

30

300

5
Checkin
Facilities

15

6
Other
Office
Buildings
100300

15

50

250

15

100300

15

100

100

100

90

100

90

100

Undergrou
nd
Corridor
0

Building

Building

Building
+Bridge

Building

Building
+Bridge

Direct

23

23

12

Yes
5001000

Yes
300500

Yes
300500

Yes
300500

Yes
5001000

Yes
300500

Yes
300500

Many

Many

Many

Many

Some

Some

Yes
Many

Yes
Many

Yes
Many

Yes
Many

Yes
Many

Yes
Many

Yes
0

Private

Private

MTR

MTR

Commercia
lActivities

Green
Spaceand
Open
Harbor
View
Building&
Footbridge

Full

0
0

Very
Functional

MTR
+Private
OpenSpace
and
Functional

Building

Building&
Footbridge

Direct

Full

Full

Full

0
0

0
0

0
0

Vertically
well
integrated

Longopen
footbridge
networkat
thesecond
floorlevel

Functionall
yintegrated
withMTR

MTR

Design
Amenity

T
PTI

MTR
+Private
IFC
& Art Space, In
Functional, Commercia
andRetails l
Activities

Sidewalk
Type

Corridor

Building

Building

Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#
Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

Full

Full

Full

0
0

0
0

0
0

High
capacity
undergroun
dwalking
corridor

Pedestrians
vertically
pass
throughthe
commercial
floorsby
the
travelator

Integrated,
butnotwell
connected

A2-22

Twodirect
footbridges
to/from
IFC,which
keepopen
air

OpenSpace
and
Functional

Appendix3
QualityofCatchmentArea
NonR+PCases&NonStationCases

A3.1QuarryBay(NonR+PCase:Office)
Quarry Bay
Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

2

1
T
4
5

FigureA3.1.1.QuarryBayCatchmentAreaMap

A3- 1

CorridorExitC

Pedestrians:ExitA

SignageSystem

Entrance/ExitC

AroundExitC

ExitB

Walking Environments from

MTRtotheMarketPlace

Bridge from the Private Bridge from/to the Old

MarketDistrict
Property

FigureA3.1.2.QuarryBayCatchmentAreaPhotos

A3- 2

TableA3.1.QuarryBaySurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

May14,2007/2:35pm
1
2
NorthPoint
Market
Government
Center
Offices

Walking
Distancem
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

200

400

3
Quarry
Park

500

200

350

#:UpDown
Mechanized?

No
200

Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement
Signage#&Type

Design
Amenity
Sidewalk
Type
Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#
Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

5
OldRetail
District

T
BusBay

150

300

100

250

100

250

50

12

15

40

20

25

50

30

100

Corridor

Corridor
1

Roofed
Bridge
2

Sheltered
Bridge
1

Roofed
Bridge
2

Roofed
Bridge
2

No
200

Yes
200

Yes
300400

No
200

Yes&No
200500

2030

10

0
1

0
0

0
0

0
2

0
0

0
1

No

MTR
No

MTR
& No

4
Bay TaikooPlace
(MajorPrivate
Bld.)

No

No

Normal
Bothsides

No
HeavyTraffic
Disturbing
2
12min

Normal
Bothsides

No
HeavyTraffic
Disturbing
2
30s

Normal
&
NoSidewalk
No
HeavyTraffic
Disturbing
2
24

Toomany
commercial
vehicles

Oldretail
activities,
noisyand
manytaxis
andtrucks

Mainlyfor
passiveuses

A3- 3

Private
SmallPlant
Clean
(BridgePart)
Normal
&
Bridge
Full

Bridge

Normal
&
Bridge
Full

Full

0
0

0
0

0
0

Private
propertytries
tokeepaccess
toMTR
station.Ahalf
ofthewayis
comfortable
duetothe
private
bridge.

Oldandnoisy Direct
district.Isaw connectionto
thatinformal
thebusbay
hairsalonwas
openedonthe
bridge

A3.2NgauTauKok(NonR+PCase:Residential)
Ngau Tau Kok
Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

2
3

FigureA3.2.1.NgauTauKokCatchmentAreaMap

A3- 4

MTRandBusBay

PublicSignageSystem

EntranceoftheUnderground Underground Path to the

PathNetwork
ResidentialTowers

WalkwaytotheBusBay

Footbridge from the Private

Property

MTR,
Highway
and Underground Path to the Inaccessible path at the
CamberofCommerce
groundlevel
DisconnectedFootbridge

FigureA3.2.2.NgauTauKokCatchmentAreaPhotos

A3- 5

TableA3.2.NgauTauKokSurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination

May15,2007/3:30pm
1
2
Residential
Office
(LotusTower)
(Millennium

City)

3
HKCamberof
Commerce

WalkingDistance
m
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

30

100

150

4
T
HKCamberof BusBay
Commerce
(AnotherPath)

150
10

15

70

100

100

10

10

10

50

Underground
2

No
300

35

Footbridge
2

No
200300

35

Building
2

No
200300

35

Underground
2

No
200300

Pub/Private
NoDesign

Public
Privatebased
Footbridge

Footbridge
andNormal

Footbridge
Buildingand
Normal

MTR
Simple
Underground
Path
Underground
Pathand
Normal

Full

AlmostFull

Full

Full

0
0

1
1min

0
0

0
0

Comingfrom
oneprivate
propertybut
notfully
reachedto
MTRstation.

Notreallywell Theold
coordinated
underground
pathisnot
pleasant

#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement

Yes
Signage#&Type 2

MTR
Design
& Simple
Amenity
Underground
Path
Sidewalk
Underground
Type
Path
and
Normal

Separation
Full
FromAuto
Interchange#
0
Interchange
0
WaitingTime
Note
Widebutnot
pleasant

A3- 6

300
0

Public
GreenPocket

Normal(One
side)

Infrontof
MTRstation

A3.3CausewayBay(NonR+PCase:Office&Retail)
Causeway Bay

1
2

4
Walking Path
Destination

T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA3.3.1.CausewayBayCatchmentAreaMap

A3- 7

MTR Station Underground ExitE1

Space

PublicSignageSystem

and

Pedestrians at the ground Times Square at the ground

level
level

Arcade

Retails,
Sidewalk
Intersection

Limited
Access

Private

Vehicle Constructiononthestreet

FigureA3.3.2.CausewayBayCatchmentAreaPhotos

A3- 8

TableA3.3.CausewayBaySurveySheet
Date/Time
Path
Destination
WalkingDistance
m
LinearDistance
m
WalkngTime
Min.
Indoor%
StructureType

May16,2007/1:20pm
1
2
ExcelsiorHotel
VictoriaPark

50
150

3
LeeGarden

4
HappyValley
300

30

150

300

200

10

10

50

Roof
0

200500

300

200300

200300

Many

Signage#&Type 1

Public
Design
& Dense
Retail
Amenity
Activities
Sidewalk
RetailArcade
Type

Many

Public
Dense
Retail
Activities
Normal

Many

Public
Dense
Retail
Activities
Normal

Many

Public

Separation
FromAuto
Interchange#
Interchange
WaitingTime
Note

No

No

No

No

1
10sec

2
3min

3
30sec

3
2min

Verycrowdedand
nodirectionalat
thegroundlevel
butprivatecaruse
islimited

Notsocrowded
buttherearesome
minor
constructionson
thestreets.

#:UpDown
Mechanized?
Width
Cm
#:Retails
Advertisement

Very crowded and Verycrowdedand

no directional at nodirectionalat
thegroundlevel
thegroundlevel

A3- 9

250

Normal

A3.4EastTsimShaTsui(NonStationCase:Urban)
East Tsim Sha Tsui

FigureA3.4.1.EastTsimShaTsuiDevelopmentAreaMap

OpenSpace

OpenSpace2

WideStreet

CommercialVehicleAccess

RetailsandWalking

KCRStation

FigureA3.4.2.EastTsimShaTsuiDevelopmentAreaPhotos

A3-10

A3.5SouthHorizons(NonStationCase:Suburban)
South Horizons
N

M Mall
T Public Transport Interchange

FigureA3.5.1.SouthHorizonsDevelopmentAreaMap

MainBusTerminal

CommunityPark

ResidentialTowers

DistrictCenter(Mall)

Oceanside Residential Tower Bus Stops and Intra

andWalkway
CommunityCirculation

FigureA3.5.2.SouthHorizonsDevelopmentAreaPhotos

A3-11

A3-12

Appendix4
PartnershipModels

A4.1Admiralty(HO):1980

Office

Mall

PTI
Station

Office

Mall

PublicTransport
Interchange
1.Construction Developerbasedonrailway/developmentcoordinateddesignand
enablingworksprovidedbyMTRC
2.Mechanism Developerpaidlandpremiumand
Conditionsinlandgrant
ofsharingcost developmentcost
/profit
Investmentreturnsplitbyendprofitsharing
3.Ownership
Multipleowners
Multipleowners
Government
ofAsset
4.
MTRC
MTRC
Governmentdelegated
Management
tooperator

FigureA4.1.Admiralty(HO)PartnershipDiagram

A4- 1

A4.2TinHau(HR):1989

Residential

2
Parking

PTI
Station

ResidentialTowers

PublicCarPark

PublicTransport
Interchange
1.
Developerbasedonrailway/developmentcoordinateddesignandenabling
Construction
worksprovidedbyMTRC
2.Mechanism Developerpaidland
Conditionsinlandgrant
ofsharingcost premiumand
/profit
developmentcost
Investmentreturn
splitbyendprofit
sharing
3.Ownership Individualflatowners Government
ofAsset
4.
MTRCdelegatedto
Governmentdelegated Governmentdelegated
Management
managementcompany tooperator
tooperator

FigureA4.2.TinHau(HR)PartnershipDiagram

A4- 2

A4.3HangHau(MR):2005

Residential

2 2

Mall
PTI
Station

ResidentialTowers

Mall

PublicTransport
Interchange

1.
Developerbasedonrailway/developmentcoordinateddesignandenabling
Construction worksprovidedbyMTRC
2.
Mechanism
ofsharing
cost/profit

Developerpaidlandpremiumanddevelopment Conditionsinlandgrant
cost
Investmentreturnsplitbyendprofitsharing
andsharinginkind

3.
Ownership
ofAsset

Individualflatowners

4.
MTRC
Management

MTRC

Government

MTRC

Governmentdelegated
tooperator

FigureA4.3.HangHau(MR)PartnershipDiagram

A4- 3

A4.4HongKong(LM):1998

Office

Hotel & SA Office

Mall

POS
PTI
Station
Parking

Office

Mall

Serviced
Roof
Public
Apartment& Garden
Transport
Hotel
(Public
Interchange
Open
Space)

1.
Developerbasedonrailway/developmentcoordinateddesignandenabling
Construction worksprovidedbyMTRC
2.Mechanism Developerpaidlandpremiumand
Conditionsinlandgrant
ofsharing
developmentcost
cost/profit
Investmentreturnsplitbysharinginkind
3.Ownership MTRC,
Developer
Common
Government
ofAsset
Developer
areaofall
andHong
owners
Kong
Monetary
Authority
4.
1IFC
Developer
Hotel
MTRC
Government
Management Developer
operator
delegatedto ordedicated
2IFC
developer
operator
MTRC

FigureA4.4.HongKong(LM)PartnershipDiagram

A4- 4