Considering fixed-guideway systems more broadly, including heavy, light, or commuter rail, in addition to BRT systems, studies in the United States suggest that public transport has a gentrification effect on local housing markets. Immergluck (2009) finds that the public announcement and planning of a rail transit initiative in Atlanta had positive effects on the prices of homes located close to the development. In a similar line, Lin (2002) concludes that the presence of transit in Chicago had a gentrifying effect as evidenced by changes in residential property values close to transit stations. Looking at 14 large U.S. cities, Kahn (2007) finds that there is less gentrification in communities with greater access to park and ride stations—parking lots next to public transport connections for commuters—than in communities with growing access to walk and ride stations, that is, sole public transportation access.

The studies closest to the study described in this paper are probably those of Gleaser, Kahn, and Rappoport (2008) and Pollack, Bluestone, and Billingham (2010), which show results for the effects of public transportation investment on income and poverty rates. Gleaser, Kahn, and Rappoport hypothesize that the concentration of poverty in U.S. inner cities is caused by the better access to public transportation. They show, first, that areas in New York City’s outer boroughs that are closer to subway stops are poorer than those farther away. They then look at rail expansions in 16 major cities and establish that the census tracts in these cities that were directly affected by an expansion became poorer. However, Pollack, Bluestone, and Billingham find results that are almost polar opposites: analyzing changes between 1990 and 2000 in 42 neighborhoods in 12 metropolitan areas that introduced rail transit, they show that, in directly affected neighborhoods, home prices have increased and residents have become wealthier and more likely to own cars. These changes were particularly pronounced in areas with a high stock of rental housing.

# **3. Barranquilla’s Transmetro System**

BRT systems have earned more recognition in recent years for their ability to mitigate urban congestion and inefficient public transportation. To qualify as a BRT system, a bus network must be able to use dedicated lanes to provide efficient speed and mobility for the buses. Latin America has been home to many such systems. Pioneered by Curitiba in Brazil and Quito in Ecuador, such systems have spread to other large capital cities, such as Bogotá and Mexico City, and farther on to smaller cities. In particular, Colombia has been avid in adopting BRT systems. The TransMilenio system was introduced in Bogotá in 2001, and the country’s second and third largest cities, Medellín and Cali, followed suit in 2011 and 2009, respectively. Several other smaller cities have since implemented similar systems or are planning to do so in the near future. One of them is Barranquilla, which is the subject of the study described in this paper.

Barranquilla is of interest for several reasons. With over 2 million people, the Barranquilla metropolitan area, consisting of the municipalities of Barranquilla, Galapa, Malambo, Puerto Colombia, and Soledad, is Colombia’s fourth largest population center. However, it is only about half the size of the second and third biggest metropolitan areas (Medellín and Cali). It therefore constitutes 8