Introduction

Background on Guadalajara

Guadalajara is a city in western central Mexico and the capital of the state of Jalisco. The Área Metropolitana del Guadalajara (AMG) is the second-largest metropolitan area in Mexico with around 5.3 million residents. AMG is comprised of nine municipalities, two of which—Guadalajara and Zapopan—have a population of over a million [1].

The city, founded in 1542, has served as an administrative center in western Mexico since Spanish colonialism. Despite its age, most of the city’s growth occurred in the twentieth century, with widespread migration to the city occurring from 1940 to 1980. During that time, Guadalajara’s population doubled every decade. Many migrated from rural areas to work in nearby maquiladoras (foreign-ran, low-cost factories) for major electronics corporations like IBM and Motorola. More recently, Guadalajara has been de-industrializing and moving toward a services-based economy [2].

Rapid urbanization across Mexico was met with an inadequate housing supply. In the mid-twentieth century, the country began to promote homeownership through federal programs like FOVI and INFONAVIT that incentivized the construction and purchase of “social-interest” housing. Population growth in Guadalajara from 1970 to 2000 was met with three types of housing: social-interest (40.9%), higher-income (11.3%), and informal (47.6%) (Figure 1). Informal housing emerged among low-income populations and workers in the informal economy who were not eligible for participation in federal programs. Thus, social interest housing tended to serve middle-income and working-class groups [3].

Guadalajara’s population growth initiated horizontal expansion in the metropolitan area (Figure 2), with limited vertical expansion through increased density (Figure 3) [4]. The city’s urbanized growth mimicked aspects of American suburbanization, “replete with congested roads, segregated enclaves, concentrations of poverty, and construction in hazardous environments” (Harner et al., 2009, p. 485).

With development ranging from lavish, gated communities to informal neighborhoods—although, as Harner et al. (2009) highlight, there is a grey area in what is considered informal—Guadalajara’s expanding periphery contained inconsistent land uses and a lack of central planning. Further, lower-income residents were largely pushed out of the city center, where job opportunities tended to be (Figure 4). As Guadalajara’s urban landscape evolved, the need for an efficient, coordinated transportation system grew.

Background on BRT

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is a form of public transit that provides faster and higher-capacity service than traditional buses. The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) establishes five key components of BRT: (1) buses have a dedicated right-of-way and do not mix with other traffic, (2) busways occupy the center of a road or a BRT-only corridor, (3) fare collection occurs at the station and not on the bus, (4) other traffic cannot turn across bus lanes, and (5) boarding platforms at stations are at level with the bus [5]. These components reduce delays due to congestion in mixed traffic, onboard fare collection, and boarding and alighting, allowing for more efficient service than traditional bus systems.

Latin American cities developed and popularized BRT, starting in 1993 with modifications to the Rede Integrada de Transporte in Curitiba, Brazil. These changes simulated a metro system using buses, a savvy and cost-effective solution to growing transportation demands by mayor Jaime Lerner. The success of this early BRT system spread around Latin America and was notably implemented in Bogotá, Colombia with Enrique Peñalosa’s Transmilenio system [6]. To date, about 60% of daily BRT ridership occurs in Latin America [7].

Bus Rapid Transit in Guadalajara

History of Guadalajara BRT and Mi Transporte System

In 2003, Peñalosa delivered a speech in Guadalajara, emphasizing how cities in the Global South can learn from each other rather than copying models of the Global North. With this, he promoted practices implemented during his term as mayor of Bogotá, including BRT. The talk also served as a fundraiser for Ciudades Públicas, a precursor to the non-governmental organization Guadalajara 2020 (GDL 2020) that was integral to the development of Guadalajara’s BRT system. In the following years, GDL 2020 sponsored study tours to Bogotá to learn from the Transmilenio system for various business, organizational, and governmental parties. With these tours, GDL 2020 sought to popularize BRT among key actors in the city.

These efforts were successful, particularly with former mayor Emilio González who became the governor of Jalisco in 2007. González wanted to use a major transportation project to distract from corruption scandals. After the 2006 election, the mayors of AMG’s largest municipalities belonged to González’s political party—the National Action Party (PAN)—for the first time in decades. Future chief of transportation for Jalisco, Diego Monraz, used a study tour to Bogotá to unite AMG’s mayors on a wide-scale project that could enhance the image of the party. Study tours also eased the concerns of private bus company owners—major transportation actors in the city—and impressed the media, who popularized BRT and made it a key topic in the subsequent election [8].

AMG’s first BRT line, Mi Macro Calzada (then known as Macrobús), began construction in 2008 and opened in 2009. Besides Bogotá, engineers looked to Mexico City’s BRT system, helping to expedite the planning and construction process of the Macrobús [9]. This line runs north to south across Guadalajara and two other AMG municipalities. When it opened, there were two light rail transit (LRT) lines also in operation—Lines 1 and 2 of Mi Tren. Line 1 opened in 1989 and runs north to south, including a 5.3 kilometer tunnel under the city center, and Line 2 opened in 1994 and runs east to west.

Plans for a second BRT line along the periphery of the city, Mi Macro Periférico, began in 2013 and opened in 2022 after several delays in trying to receive federal funding. Additionally, Line 4 of the LRT system is under construction and expected to open in 2024. SITEUR, Jalisco’s public transit agency, also combined its transit networks—including a bicycle parking system and SiTren, a bus service that runs from peripheral areas to the LRT termini—into the Mi Transporte system (Figure 5). This also allowed them to create an integrated fare system via the Mi Movilidad card [10].

Costs and Governance

Mi Macro Calzada cost around $143 million in 2023 USD (“Cleaner,” 2010) while Mi Macro Periférico cost $511 million [11]. There is limited information on the operating costs of both lines.

In Mexico, state authorities are largely responsible for public transportation. AMG’s public transit system is operated by Sistemo de Tren Eléctrico Urbano (SITEUR), an agency owned by the state of Jalisco. While SITEUR has existed since the 1980s when Line 1 of Mi Tren opened, a regional planning authority for AMG was not established until 2014. This decentralized public entity, Instituto de Planeacion del Area Metropolitana de Guadalajara (IMEPLAN), is responsible for transportation planning in the region.

While public transit maintains a strong presence in AMG, private transit dominates in peripheral municipalities. Figure 6 depicts the combined public and private transportation network of Guadalajara. Instead of public transit, peripheral residents rely on private buses, informal buses (i.e., lacking a government license to operate), and motorcycle taxis to travel to the central city [12]. However, this analysis by Aranda-Salgado (2021) was performed before Mi Macro Periférico opened, which has expanded public transit into the periphery. While informal transportation is ungoverned, it must be considered by IMEPLAN while planning due to the volume of its service and its effects on the city.

Outcomes and Lessons Learned

Guadalajara’s implementation of bus rapid transit and efforts toward an integrated, multimodal system have been generally successful. Based on 2019 data, service is efficient with peak frequency times for BRT and LRT ranging from 4 to 7 minutes. LRT provides much higher capacity than BRT—with the ability to seat over 325 more passengers per vehicle—but BRT’s capacity still outweighs a regular bus service. Combined, SITEUR serves about 400,000 passengers on a given workday.

While this is a large volume of passengers, private bus ridership remains much higher than public transit ridership in AMG. About a third of workday trips in AMG use some type of transit, and of those, a tenth use public transit (3.23%), with the rest using private bus carriers (32.76%). Of that 3.23%, about 64% use LRT and 30% use BRT. Thus, despite massive public transportation investments, bus rapid transit only comprises about 1% of all workday trips in the metropolitan area (however, this data was collected before the second BRT line opened) [13].

Nonetheless, Guadalajara BRT was by no means a failure. Ochoa-Covarrubias et al. (2021) also found in their study that SITEUR services have high satisfaction ratings and are considered much higher quality than private bus services in the city. Further, although the study highlights major transport access disparities between central and peripheral areas (with the latter demonstrating high transport need), this has already been addressed to an extent with Mi Macro Periférico opening in 2022. Due to the newness of this line, is unclear whether it has reduced social exclusion, but early metrics suggest success; the line has a daily ridership of 300,000 passengers, many of whom transfer at Mi Macro Calzada or Mi Tren Lines 1 and 2 to reach the central city [14].

Moreover, Guadalajara’s BRT demonstrated how studying systems in other cities can lead to positive outcomes. Not only did study tours to Bogotá sway key actors to support a major infrastructure project, but using Mexico City’s BRT to inform their process led Guadalajara to construct Mi Macro Calzada in less than a year. And although Mi Macro Periférico experienced delays, the project began operation within less than a decade of its initial conception, with support of the project generated from the success of the first BRT line.

Last, SITEUR has done an effective job with branding through websites, signage, and marketing that is bright and welcoming. For example, each stop has a unique icon and name (rather than being named after intersecting streets). Further, each line has its own colors, and stops that are transfer points between lines have icons with both lines’ colors (Figure 7) [15]. Station design, particularly on Mi Macro Periférico, is also well done. The line’s forty-two stations have pedestrian bridges, ramps, elevators, bright lighting at night, free wifi, bicycle parking, bathrooms, lactation rooms, and planters, and are bordered by transparent walls to improve visibility and safety (Figure 8) [16]. Details like these make transit more accessible and appealing to riders.

Recommendations for Chapel Hill

Background on Chapel Hill

Chapel Hill, North Carolina is a large town in the southeastern United States, with a population of around 62,000 [17]. While the town’s economy is primarily based on an academic institution—the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)—it is a part of the greater Raleigh-Durham metropolitan area, which is also known as the Research Triangle due to its concentration of universities and research activity. Together, this region has a population of about 2.1 million and continues to grow [18].

Several transit agencies exist in the region, all of which operate typical bus services. Chapel Hill and its neighboring community of Carrboro are primarily served by Chapel Hill Transit, an agency operated by the Town of Chapel Hill [19].

North-South Bus Rapid Transit

Chapel Hill aims to be the first American city of its size with a bus rapid transit system. Known as North-South Bus Rapid Transit (NSBRT), the route is planned along the busy Columbia Street-MLK Boulevard corridor, encompassing key employment centers like downtown Chapel Hill, UNC, and UNC Hospitals, as well as major apartment and housing complexes (Figure 9). However, based on ITDP’s bus rapid transit qualifications, NSBRT is not true BRT; with the current plan, buses will enter mixed traffic around the city center, and buses occupy the rightmost lane instead of the center lane. These choices make sense given the limited space of the corridor but will reduce potential speed and frequency [20].

Unlike Guadalajara’s BRT network, whose lines are longer and extend throughout a metropolitan region, NSBRT aims to provide faster, higher-capacity buses across a small city and not a greater metropolitan area. Further, NSBRT seeks to serve a much smaller and higher-income population. Despite these differences, there are several lessons Chapel Hill can take away from Guadalajara’s BRT and Mi Transporte system.

Chapel Hill is already implementing one method that Guadalajara used—learning from other cities. In particular, the town has studied how other American cities executed their BRT systems, ranging from larger cities like Charlotte to smaller ones like Fort Collins. Below are three other recommendations for the town as it continues to plan its BRT line.

Recommendation 1: East-West and Peripheral Routes

For future BRT segments, Chapel Hill should consider east-west and peripheral routes. For Guadalajara, north-south and east-west coverage in the city was already robust between its LRT and BRT lines. Although on a much smaller scale, Chapel Hill has a similar pattern of higher density in the center and lower density in the peripheries. Nonetheless, peripheral areas have many inhabitants across apartment complexes and housing developments. To give these people access to the city center without a car, residents can ride the peripheral BRT line to the four transfer points of the other lines. This system will also allow central residents to access periphery commercial areas, such as Eastgate Crossing.

Recommendation #2: Multimodality Integration

Guadalajara’s BRT lines are just one form of transit used in the metropolitan area. While plans for light rail transit between Chapel Hill and Durham fell through [21], Raleigh is implementing bus rapid transit on some of its main corridors [22]. Once these systems are operating, I recommend that they be connected into a larger system that lowers the travel time between core Triangle cities. However, these are much longer distances than currently planned. As seen in Guadalajara, past success motivated enthusiasm for future transportation projects; in a similar sense, success in Chapel Hill and Raleigh BRT can be used as a stepping stone for larger transportation projects like light rail.

Additionally, Chapel Hill lacks an effective bike share program. To work towards a car-optional future, sufficient bike routes and walking infrastructure—including nighttime infrastructure like street lighting—will be necessary for the success of the BRT program. Like Guadalajara, Chapel Hill needs to provide bicycle parking at its stations.

Recommendation #3: Accessible and Appealing Design

With the current NSBRT design, stations do not occupy the center of the road and there are no pedestrian crossings over the street due to spatial limitations. Further, stations themselves will not have much space to work with, and stops are located close enough together that no single stop will have enough passenger demand for amenities like bathrooms. That being said, Chapel Hill can incorporate some elements of Guadalajara’s station design: planters and greenery, bicycle parking, bright lighting at night, transparent walls for enhanced safety, handicap-accessible infrastructure, and identifiable stops. Additionally, Chapel Hill should incorporate unique stop names and icons to make NSBRT’s branding familiar and inviting.

References

1 Metropolitan Area of Guadalajara. (n.d.). Jalisco Gobierno del Estado. Retrieved November 16, 2023, from https://www.jalisco.gob.mx/es/jalisco/guadalajara

2 Napolitano, V. (2002). Migration, Mujercitas, and Medicine Men: Living in Urban Mexico. University of California Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unc/detail.action?docID=224152

3 Harner, J., Jimenez Huerta, E., & Solís, H. (2009). Buying Development: Housing and Urban Growth in Guadalajara, Mexico. Urban Geography, 30(5), 465–489. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.30.5.465

4 Cruz, H., Jiménez E., Rábago, J., & del Pilar Palomar, M. (2005). A study of urban land in the metropolitan area of Guadalajara: The expansion of the periphery between 1970 and 2000, using digital mapping and GIS.

5 What is BRT? (2014, July 24). Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. https://www.itdp.org/library/standards-and-guides/the-bus-rapid-transit-standard/what-is-brt/

6 Reed, D. (2015, May 26). How Curitiba’s BRT stations sparked a transport revolution – a history of cities in 50 buildings, day 43. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/26/curitiba-brazil-brt-transport-revolution-history-cities-50-buildings

7 Global BRT Data. (n.d.). BRT+ Center of Excellence. Retrieved November 15, 2023, from https://brtdata.org/

8 Montero, S. (2017). Study tours and inter-city policy learning: Mobilizing Bogotá’s transportation policies in Guadalajara. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49(2), 332–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16669353

9 Cleaner, Greener Public Transit a Success in Mexico and Elsewhere. (2010). Hewlett Foundation. https://hewlett.org/newsroom/cleaner-greener-public-transit-a-success-in-mexico-and-elsewhere/

10 Sistemo de Tren Eléctrico Urbano. (n.d.). Retrieved December 5, 2023, from https://www.siteur.gob.mx

11 Jalisco state finishes major BRT project, readies new US$500mn light rail. (2022). BNamericas. https://www.bnamericas.com/en/features/mexicos-jalisco-state-finishes-major-brt-project-readies-new-us478mn-light-rail-line

12 Aranda-Salgado, V. (2021). Socioeconomic Distribution and its interaction with Public Transport Network in the Metropolitan Area of Guadalajara, a transport-related study. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13059.17442

13 Ochoa-Covarrubias, G., Grindlay, A. L., & Lizarraga, C. (2021). Does the Mass Public Transport System Cover the Social Transport Needs? Targeting SDG 11.2 in Guadalajara, Mexico. Applied Sciences, 11(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/app11167709

14 Obras y su impacto social: Mi Macro Periférico. (2023). Gobierno de México. http://www.gob.mx/banobras/articulos/obras-y-su-impacto-social-mi-macro-periferico?idiom=es

15 Mi Macro Periférico. (n.d.). Sistemo de Tren Eléctrico Urbano. https://mimacro.jalisco.gob.mx

16 Coulleri, A., & Carlos Díaz, C. (2022). Mi Macro periférico / Agraz Arquitectos + Echauri Morales Arquitectos + Cuadra Urbanismo. ArchDaily México. https://www.archdaily.mx/mx/991681/mi-macro-periferico-agraz-arquitectos-plus-echauri-morales-arquitectos-plus-cuadra-urbanismo

17 U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Chapel Hill town, North Carolina. (n.d.). U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/chapelhilltownnorthcarolina/POP060210

18 Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC CSA. (n.d.). Census Reporter. http://www.censusreporter.org/profiles/33000US450-raleigh-durham-cary-nc-csa/

19 Transit. (n.d.). Town of Chapel Hill, NC. https://www.townofchapelhill.org/government/departments-services/transit

20 North-South Bus Rapid Transit. (n.d.). Chapel Hill Transit. Retrieved December 11, 2023, from https://nsbrt.org/

21 Light Rail. (n.d.). GoTriangle. https://gotriangle.org/lightrail/home

22 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Projects. (2023). City of Raleigh. https://raleighnc.gov/bus-rapid-transit