Interesting but not shocking report: in five metro areas studied, home prices fared better when the homes were near transit. The five metro areas are Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Phoenix and San Francisco.
The study is above. It was done by the American Public Transportation Assn., a transit industry trade group, and the National Assn. of Realtors. My hunch is that living near a major transit line in Los Angeles also helps home values. Agree? Comment please.
Categories: Policy & Funding
I live near one of the stations of the in-progress GL Foothill Extension.
I don’t think I live close enough for my property value to be impacted by the station. It’s about a 20-minute walk or about a 10-minute bicycle ride.
But I am sure basically every property listing in my hood will boast being near a Gold Line station once the Foothill Extension is up and running. Those properties out in the farther out areas that can’t claim the same certainly won’t win any cookie points with potential buyers.
I’ve seen a few listings saying it already… “near future Gold Line station.”
[…] Remember the Study Showing Transit Good for Housing Prices? That’s True in L.A. Too (The Source) […]
Rising property values is one thing, keeping it affordable is another. Most middle class families can only afford up to $200,000 in mortgages.
We do not want another mortgage meltdown crisis where people are duped into buying $500,000 mortgages on a condo that a majority of Angelenos cannot pay for.
Something has to be done to bring down the prices of condos for new and first time buyers. What’s the point of building so many condos in the $500,000-$1,000,000 range that only the rich can afford?
Most middle class Angelenos would rather look into buying a $200,000 home way out in a neighboring county and commute here because that’s what they can afford. How is that going to help alleviate congestion on the freeways?
If you really want a transit oriented dense living city, they need to encourage it with much lower condo prices, a price range that is affordable for the middle class.
I’ve heard the same about the Washington DC area. And quite often when I look at rental listings here in LA, I see landlords boasting the property’s proximity to Metro rail lines or even bus stops.
Hi Pat;
I live in Pasadena, where hundreds of apartments and condos have been built close to the Gold Line. And they’re pricey, a reflection in part of having a good mobility option. And it will be even better when the Regional Connector speeds up the trip into downtown proper and the subway heads further west.
Steve Hymon
Editor, The Source
More than likely.
I’ll note that when I travel, proximity to transit is a major factor when I choose a hotel. For example, in San Francisco, the No. 30 trolley bus stops almost literally at the door of my usual hotel, and there’s a cable car turntable within about a 2-3 minute walk. In Chicago, the hotel I usually stay at is only a block away from a Red Line “L” subway station, and in Boston, I’m only half a block from the nearest Green Line “T” subway station.
I would generally agree. Although I think it depends on the quality of the transit. I would not consider a Metrolink station in making a home choice given its poor service, other than not wanting to live near freight tracks. I assume others agree since I have not seen a home listing in my neighborhood mention the Metrolink station, despite being a 20 minute walk (5 minute car ride) to the station. LADOT commuter buses suffer from the same service issue.
LACMTA concluded in 2011 that the Orange Line has not attributed to any private investment. The Woodland Hills development plan (a very impressive piece of work) mentions the Orange Line conversation to light rail as a reason to develop, and seems almost apologetic to the current bus mode. If a busway doesn’t attract development, then that limits the impact it can have on real estate values.
I do like the frequent and long hours of Metro lines and the LADOT Dash. Those two things would influence my decision as to where my next home is.