Link

KPCC logo

From about 2004 to 2006, I did regular commentaries for National Public Radio’s affiliate in Los Angeles. Many of them are available online.

Los Angeles Times: Real Estate Feature

Commercial Real Estate

Rail Access Can Enhance Property Values

Angelenos’ skepticism aside, many cities report that homes near transit stations often command hefty premiums.

December 04, 2001 ROGER RUDICK | SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

 

As Southern California’s rail transit system continues to grow, so does debate over what effect tracks and stations have on nearby properties.

While no firm evidence exists for the Los Angeles region, experience in other cities suggests that access to rail transit will gradually cause a measurable increase in property values. Yet many property owners near existing and planned Los Angeles rail lines remain convinced that the constant train noise and activity reduce real estate prices.

In less than a decade, “you could see 5% to 10% premiums,” said Larry Kosmont, a Los Angeles-based real estate consultant, “If you have access to transportation, it’s considered a benefit.”

With support for subway construction waning, the MTA has turned to the less-expensive alternative of building above-ground light rail on existing rights of way, several left over from Los Angeles’ historic Red Car system.

Opponents of this plan–including many homeowners with property near the old track lines–complain that the revived lines will be a nuisance.

Supporters point to other cities where homes within walking distance of rail lines, including those on the surface, are coveted. It is an established principle, said urban economist Aaron Gruen of San Francisco-based Gruen Gruen & Associates, that proximity to transit service increases land values.

Boston and Toronto, for example, both preserved large portions of their original trolley lines and modernized them into light rail.

Single-family residences in Boston are valued an average of 6.7% higher in neighborhoods with rail stations compared with neighborhoods without them, according to a 1994 study by the Washington-based Transportation Research Board, a nonprofit institute that operates the National Academy of Engineering.

Residential properties in Toronto carry a higher value if located near rail, according to a 1999 economic impact study prepared by the University of North Texas.

Portland and San Diego, with newer light rail systems, have seen similar boosts in property values.

In Portland, residential properties within 500 meters of a light rail station fetch an average of 10.6% more than comparable properties farther away, according to a 1999 study by the research firm of Booz-Allen & Hamilton.

In San Diego, the study said, property values increase an average of $2 per meter the closer the property is to transit.

But San Diego may not be an apt comparison to Los Angeles, said Gary London, a San Diego-based real estate analyst. Downtown San Diego has substantial residential and tourist elements as well as office commuters.

Yet Dallas, as decentralized and automobile-dependent as Los Angeles, is often cited by light rail advocates. The University of North Texas study found inconsistent but often substantial increases in property values from 1994 to 1998 in areas served by its light rail over similar properties outside the service area.

There is some extra property value attributed to proximity to transit, London agreed. But in Southern California, “The premium is minimal compared to views or ZIP Codes.” While a home with an ocean view can command 50% more on the market than a similar house located inland, transit access is not likely to bring more than a 10% premium, he said.

In Long Beach, where a light rail line from downtown Los Angeles has operated for a decade, real estate agents say properties have increased in value as much as 30% in recent years. There may be several causes for the rise.

Real estate analysts agree that, so far, there’s been no demonstrable upward effect that can be tied to proximity to the line, although they note that advertisements for homes often boast of access to light rail. Still, “it just doesn’t drive values” either way, said Harvey Mark, a Prudential agent who represents Long Beach properties.

“I think there will be real estate price bumps for parcels close to transit in Los Angeles, but it’s going to come later,” said Bill Fulton, president of Solimar Research Group, a Ventura-based urban planning consultancy.

The North Texas study found that it can sometimes take decades before significant increases in valuations occur to transit-adjacent properties. According to the study, this explains why cities with older transit systems such as Boston, Toronto and New York have more consistent positive effects.

The study suggests that the cost of moving is higher than the perceived advantage of living or operating a business close to transit. Therefore, not until new residents enter the area–or old residents decide to move for other reasons–does increased demand begin to drive up values for properties near transit.

There’s such a thing as being too close, according to sales agent Mark, who represents a tract of townhomes where one row is right up against the Long Beach line. “You can reach out and shake hands with the conductor,” he said. Homes adjacent to the line sell well, he said, but fetch 5% less than homes in the next row and the rest of the development.

“Just 50 feet farther along, there’s no [negative] effect” on price, Mark said.

“Trolleys are typically quiet and will be value neutral, but in some cases the bells do ring and they’re bothersome,” London said. But in the case of the Long Beach line and most other planned MTA light rail lines, “they’re building over tracks that already existed, so these properties were already affected,” said West De Young, branch manager of Dilbeck Realtors in South Pasadena.

Developers, it would seem, agree with the prediction that values will rise in the long haul.

In Pasadena, where the light rail line is scheduled to begin service in less than two years, two major developments have been completed.

One is Holly Street Village, a mixed-use residential complex built directly over a future Pasadena line station.

The other, far larger, project is Paseo Colorado, a mixed-use shopping mall and apartment complex which is a short walk from the Pasadena line. Other mixed-use developments are in various phases of planning around transit stops on other lines.

Betting that a bump in value will come, developers would like to squeeze as much revenue out of the parcels of adjacent land as possible, London said. This should make low-density homes within walking distance to a station a rare and highly valued commodity.

“Pasadena may be the first place where you start seeing a bonus for adjacency, if you have the quality of living in a house and can still access the line,” Kosmont said.

“People will say, ‘This is a plus to me. I want to live there so I can walk to this and go work downtown,”‘ De Young said.

 

Los Angeles Times: LA’s Traffic Monsters Op-Ed.

The Big Traffic Monster Is Us
Commentary | VOICES / A FORUM FOR COMMUNITY ISSUES
June 23, 2001|ROGER J. RUDICK | Roger J. Rudick is a journalist and author based in Los Angeles

When you’re crawling along the freeway in rush-hour traffic, did you ever wish there were someone or something to blame, such as a big traffic monster you could walk up to and tell off? No such things exist, right? Traffic just happens.

A few weeks ago I discovered that those traffic-causing monsters do exist, but they’re not monsters. They’re regular people.

A recent report says Los Angeles–again–has the worst traffic in the nation, and an average driver here spends 56 hours a year stuck in traffic. In New York, that figure is 34 hours–two hours below the national average. That’s because New Yorkers have alternatives.

When I first moved here from New York, I was determined to keep my traffic time to a minimum. I settled in Los Feliz, where I can walk to most amenities and the Red Line subway. I also joined a transit-advocacy group called Friends4Expo, which has for years been trying to convince the MTA that it should build a light-rail line–a modern trolley–from downtown to Santa Monica. This would finally join the most populated areas of Los Angeles with the rest of the city’s fledgling rail network. The L.A. City Council passed a resolution last Wednesday supporting the project. With strong support from the public, the mayor-elect and organizations up and down the route, the MTA board began hearings on whether to build this line.

You wouldn’t think it would be a hard thing to convince the board, or anyone else, that building this line is a good idea. After all, the difficulty in building rail lines is that people along the route are displaced. But in this case, the line would be built on an abandoned, but still intact, rail line that was once part of Los Angeles’ historic trolley system. There’s nobody to displace and no tunnels to dig. It’s just a matter of laying new tracks.

Or it would be, if not for a few key “not-in-my-backyard” folks along the line.

Take, for example, the neighborhoods of Cheviot Hills and west of Westwood. The Exposition Line tracks go through these neighborhoods. When some of these residents moved in, there were still freight trains running on those tracks. For the people who moved in later, well, wouldn’t the presence of tracks usually suggest a presence of trains?

Yet the people who live in these neighborhoods have unapologetically tied up the construction of this line for about 20 years. And despite an outpouring of support for the line from the rest of the city and the Westside, they’re still trying to stop the project.

Members of these homeowners associations shout all sorts of nonsense about trains being dangerous, smelly, dirty. In truth, rail is so much safer than automobiles that building the line will save lives by reducing auto use and with it, auto accidents. As for pollution, the trains, which are powered via an electric overhead wire, make no emissions.

To get construction of the line started, transit planners have devised a way to bypass Cheviot Hills and Westwood. It brings the line through far more densely populated areas, assuring more riders. But now some homeowners along the diversion route are upset, insisting the train be put back on its original route, threatening to delay the project once again

So next time you’re stuck in traffic, realize that it’s no accident that life has gotten so miserable. As for the traffic monsters, it was only recently that I discovered that an associate is one of those west-of-Westwood residents who has actively campaigned against rail on Exposition. Now when I sit in bumper-to-bumper traffic on the way to the Westside, waiting for the day when that light rail line will finally be built, all I can think of is stopping off and giving him a piece of my mind.