Property Valuation Foundation Concepts
The learning of the Impact of Rail Investment on Housing Prices in North-West Sydney has stated on the “frequency, coverage and reliability” of transit in compare to the concentration of the traffic congestion which has resulted from the access available in the different locations. In areas where the transit system provides the most amount of employment “and predictable alternatives in compared to the “time spent in private vehicle travel (and the unpredictability of traffic jams), transit accessibility is more likely to be valued”. The study has been able to depict that the smaller house with simple travel prerequisite like “working couples with no children and two full time jobs” are more likely to be served in a better way than the families with the children whose travel needs whose travel needs are more intricate in nature. “Land value uplift from light rail Gold Coast City Council (GCCC)”amount of the gains has been considered with the relevant literature is related to the connections which “relates to number of connections each node in the network has” and network which relates to the “the number of nodes in a given area”. Impact on property value for “Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)” literature of the study has been able to incorporate the various ideas which are related to the factors such as “access to employment, developmental impacts, pedestrian accessibility and market penetration”. The extent of the increase in the property value in seen to be considered with the market entry of the transit system in the respective area. The various types of the impact of the light rail transit on the values of the property has been focused on several factors. The property value premiums due has significantly increased from “3% to 40%”. In addition to this, the property value premium in the ability to develop or redevelop the properties are dependent on the use of land and amount of development which can be permitted on the property.
Table of Contents
As stated by Ewing et al. (2014), the funding pertaining to the investment in the light rail transit has been recognised with different benefits considered with the factors such as greater accessibility for the population pertaining to “employment, retail, and recreation activities”. The investments are considered with a variety impacts for the regions surrounding the rail alignment. The most evident impact of the light rail transit is taken into account with transit projects which allows the users to access retail stores with more ease. In addition to this, the space assigned to the residential property is in general higher that the space which is allocated to the other users. The main considerations of the study have been discussed on the impact of the light rail on the property values in Australia and U.S.
The learnings of the study have further recognised the land value gains which are seen to be attributable to the “light rail system on the Gold Coast, Australia”. The different types of the other sources for the empirical evidences which are included with the properties values throughout North America. The literature review of the study has included the study on the demographic and socioeconomic profile. It has also highlighted on the “accessibility provided by the new transit investment, sales price of single-family homes, apartment rents and median home value”. The main learnings of the study have been seen with the increase in the property values due to the proximity of the light rail with the highway facilities and other industrial users.
The accessibility and “amenity of residential properties along with overall affordability” has been also studied as an impact of the light rail. The important assessment of the study has been able to include the comparison of the price trends before and after rail line construction project in early 2009. The different types of the evidences from the studies from the “light rail system on the Gold Coast, Australia” is evaluated as per the net automatic property tax increase and value gains in the land. The main findings of this paper seek to understand the economic benefits as per Stage One GCLR investment. This has been considered with the degree of the reduction of the travel time and improved accessibility to the nearby property encompassing the light-rail corridor. Additionally, the studies have shown that the “North America” discerned to contending the property values such as “sales prices of single-family homes, apartment rents, and median home value” (Mulley et al. 2016).
The discourse of the study is conducted with the “Heather Macdonald, And Sumita Ghosh” which comprises of the literature review of the study on the “local value of accessibility, travel characteristics of area residents and design characteristics of area residents”. Furthermore, “Local value of accessibility” are considered with the various elements of push and pull which further increases the attractiveness of the transit. The “frequency, coverage and reliability” of transit in compare to the concentration of the traffic congestion has resulted from the access available in the different locations. In areas where the transit system provides the most amount of employment “and predictable alternatives in compared to the “time spent in private vehicle travel (and the unpredictability of traffic jams), transit accessibility is more likely to be valued”. For example, there are very few price effects from the Miami Metrorail as system exists in a very limited area. Moreover, the bus routes have shown a limited or no effect on the values of the properties (Pilgram and West 2018).
The literature review has been further able to state that the “travel characteristics of area residents” depicts the transit accessibility which are not equally valuable to all residents. The study has been able to depict that the smaller house with simple travel prerequisite like “working couples with no children and two full time jobs” are more likely to be served in a better way than the families with the children whose travel needs whose travel needs are more intricate in nature. Henceforth, the residents of a more denser housing like apartments and townhouses are more likely to value the accessibility than those residents with lower density with single detached homes. There are divergent findings which shows that the transit accessibility for the “lower- versus higher income suburbs”. There are significant evidences which evaluates that rail transit is more valuable among those individuals who are involved in a higher paid occupations and situated in the CBD regions. Such individuals are more likely to be best served as per the high-volume transit. Several concepts from the other research studies has been able to state that the individuals with lower income neighbourhoods are more likely to get benefitted from the broader scope of employment opportunities. The significant variances may be more prominent among the local employment structure and journey to work patterns (Dziauddin, Powe and Alvanides 2015).
As discussed Ma, Ye and Titheridge (2014), the “design characteristics of area residents” and the stations are more likely to create a more positive consequence on the neighbouring properties if they can be accessed with ease. Some of the various types of the other depictions are further seen to be associated to the design of the surrounding and some of the areas including the “pedestrian walkability, safety and mix of clustered train station” which are in contrast with the “walk-and ride and park-and-ride stations”. These factors are seen to outweigh any instance of disaminities. For example, the price discounts are related to the homes which are in close vicinity to park and ride reliant stations. The positive impacts of the for “home property value further away from one station to another” and those areas where the residents may avail easy parking option at the train station. The empirical evidences from the research studies has been further able to identify that the access to the light rail stations are have a better impact on the home prices in denser areas and the “neighbourhoods with more street intersections per hectare”. The significance of the local and urban structure is considered with the differing nature of the prices in the “East and West side of the line in Minneapolis”. It has been further depicted that the properties in the eastern side were removed from the negative effects such as accessibility by the “freeway and industrial area alongside the line”. On the contrary, the properties situated in the Western side has been depicted with ease of walkability across the stations. Moreover, the prices of the homes in the west side of the track were seen to be considerably high (Clewlow, Sussman and Balakrishnan 2014).
The various depictions of the analysis have highlighted in the effects of the new light-rail link on “dwelling prices by combining spatial and statistical analysis”. The GIS has further allowed to measure the distances among the properties and “Macquarie University rail station” and the statistical interpretations has been estimated with the impact of the variables in the models. The findings of the has been conducive in making contribution to the growing literature which states that the property prices need to be appreciated more before the commencement of the construction and after the “inauguration of the rail service” in compared to during the construction and opening process. The several depictions have raised many questions on the impact of the rail investment which has been capitalized into the exiting housing prices earlier in Sydney in compared to the other locations. The primary reason for the rapid response of the property prices has been taken into consideration before and after the commencement of the rail link and decrease in the prices during the time of constructions has been depicted with two main explanations. Firstly, train station accessibility in Sydney is valued more in compared to other areas. For example, the high prices price of the petrol in Australia compared to US and high parking cost in Sydney region is depicted to be the main cause. The learnings of the study have stated that the perception of the traffic congestion has added to the premium that the buyer places on a property which is seen to be convenient to a service (D. Knowles and Ferbrache 2016). Henceforth, the impact for the expectation for the improved accessibility has been discerned as the main reason for the capitalization of housing prices sooner in Sydney region than in the cities of the US. However, it has been discerned that the pushed prices have reached to unaffordable levels which has slowed down the overall process of the customer demand for the property and the same is evident with a slow rate of increase. Secondly, it has been also discerned that the improved access “may be less significant as a source of amenity for prospective buyers, and more important as an indicator of the redevelopment potential of land parcels adjacent to the new stations”. The main depiction of the study has stated that the lands distant to the new stations have increased due to the fact that the new station are seen with the perceived potential of higher intensity of use and the expectation that the land close of the vicinity of the train station will have better accessibility (Werner et al. 2016).
It has been seen that on “20 July 2015 the Gold Coast City Council (GCCC) celebrated the first anniversary of Stage One of its $1.3 billion light rail (GCLR) system”. The discourse of the paper has highlighted on the attainment economic befits from the “stage one investment in GCLR”. The study has been further able to identify the full predictions of the statutory land valuations in the “Gold Coast, Australia”, which are considered with the marginal land value gains pertaining to the direct accessibility enhancements from the construction of the “new light-rail network worth $ 300 million”. The varying nature of the statistical difficulties are seen with the marginal effects which are seen with the relevant statistical model seen with the differential value “gains in 2015 of 7.1% for the properties within 400 m proximity to the GCLR stations” (Werner et al. 2016).
The amount of the gains has been considered with the relevant literature is related to the connections which “relates to number of connections each node in the network has” and network which relates to the “the number of nodes in a given area”. The impacts observed from the literature review from the GCLR are evident with 9.5% average price increase which is like the identifiable gains in the Sydney for the heavier stations with 4.5% and 8% of the total value of the property. The average rate of the gains has been further seen to be evaluated as per the rate of the total land value in the GCLR area in 2015 and depicted to be 1.6 %. The application of the average to the conservative estimate of the marginal value gains attributable to the GCLR has suggested that there have been 84.8 million increases in the annual revenue which has been identified with a total increase by 0.5% (Higgins, Ferguson and Kanaroglou 2014).
The impact of the “new light-rail system” has significantly affected the tax levied by the state government. The marginal tax rate increase has is discerned with 1% and 1.75%. This has been depicted as an increase of $ 2.5 million as per annual tax income from the value gains from the GCLR project. The primary beneficiary pertaining to the public investment for the new infrastructure has been identified with the landowners in the locations who have obtained an improved accessibility due to the construction of the light rail system. Despite of this, it has been discerned that in rare occasions several beneficiaries have been able to contribute to the infrastructure which are in proportion with the accrued benefits. These estimations are considered with the gains in the land value near the GCLR stations which are represented with higher upfront value to the cost of “GCLR, even after the automatic increase in council rates and the incremental city-wide increase in the transport levy”. The substantial scope for the investment in the fund transport based on the value gains is apparent (Seo et al. 2018).
The impact of the “Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system” of the property values in the San Francisco Bay Area is documented in terms of the impact on the property values seen with the new developments near the transit stations. The literature of the study has been able to incorporate the various ideas which are related to the factors such as “access to employment, developmental impacts, pedestrian accessibility and market penetration” (Chen and Haynes 2015).
The literature related to the access to the employment has been able to suggest that in general there is a positive impact of the proximity to the transit on the property values. The important questions surrounding the study has been able to state on the rationale for the increase in the property values and some cases it does not. The comparison done with the Atlanta and Miami have suggested that the accessibility provided by the rail transit has a considerable impact on the values of the property. There have been several evidences which has suggested that construction of the light rail in Philadelphia area is depicted with a median price of 3.8% more than the homes which not located near the adjoining areas of commuter rail. The census data has revealed that “Philadelphia suburbs in New Jersey near commuter rail lines operated by the Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO) demonstrated a median home price of 10% above those not near commuter rail”. These evidences suggest that the primary advantage of the properties encompassing the rail in compare to others is seen with the accessibility factor which is manifested among the various types of the properties (Vermote et al. 2014).
The residential properties became centre of attraction as the residents close to the rail were able to experience a “more convenient access to the regional employment, retail, and cultural opportunities”. Furthermore, the properties holding the employment in areas such as industrial sites and offices have increased access for the labour market. The office properties have depicted a higher increase in the property value and compared the same with the industrial sites as “the standard to cluster in a denser concentration which is more evident with light-rail transit system”. The different properties are further considered to be benefited from the light rail transit contributions pertaining to the increased pedestrian traffic as per the accessibility in the areas with more pedestrians (Xu, Zhang and Aditjandra 2016).
The extent of the increase in the property value in seen to be considered with the market entry of the transit system in the respective area. The comparison made from the study has been able to confirm the notion. The statistical analysis has been able to confirm the five-light rail system situated in California- the “CalTrain commuter rail line connecting San Mateo County to San Francisco and San Jose, BART in the San Francisco Bay Area, the light rail systems Sacramento, San Jose, and San Diego”. It is discerned that the system with the highest rates of the ridership which reached to more locations in the regions such as “BART and the San Diego Trolley experienced the most significant association between distance from transit stations and property values”. It has been also depicted, that these regions have increased more than $ 2 per meter closer to the property situated in the new transit alignment. The effect was seen to be more prominent in some regions than in other. It needs to be also understood that the “Proximity to the CalTrain commuter rail service, and the Sacramento light rail system and the San Jose light rail transit system”, showed a negative relationship because of the proximity of the freeways near the adjoining light-rail tracks and heavy industry. The main comparison has been reinforced with the notion with the rail system which enjoys highest usage with the greatest increase in the property values. The main depictions for the study has been reinforces the notion that the rail transit accessibility has considered one of the strongest determinants for the escalated property values(Salon, Wu and Shewmake 2014).
The other studies have highlighted on the developmental impact of the “light-rail on property values” has been focused as per the comparison of the effect of the distance from the rail systems on the property values. As mentioned previously the main comparison implies the primary implications “that the primary effect on property values is identified with the improvement in the regional accessibility which is brought by the investment in light-rail”. It needs to be discerned that the effect of the vicinity to “rail at one point in time fails to capture the second major effect of rail on property values” (Yu, Pang and Zhang 2017). The rail transits make the locations of the nearby transits more appreciated for the potential developments and increasing the property values in these regions. Secondly, the light rail transit is more attractive for greater scope of developmental activities. The property owners are need to decide on the leads developed as per the vacant parcels required for capitalizing on the proximity to transit. In various types of the other leads the existence of the low density may be converted into higher density usage. The property conversions of the properties depict additional value. In the informal survey property in “Hillsborough County in Florida” have been recommended with the average increase in the developed parcel within the urbanized cores. This has been discerned as $19,000 more than in the underdeveloped regions of the similar urbanized cores. The literature review from the BART has further addressed about the main changes in the density around the highway intersections and usage pattern of land. These findings are more evident post construction of the light rail transit system.
The literature on the impact of the “light rail transit” is discerned with the sales process. The important understanding based on this needs to be depicted as per the various types of the “hedonic regression model (hedonic price analysis)” at the block group scale. It has been also discerned that the “impact of a newly added light rail system on single-family housing values in Charlotte, North Carolina”. The research is based on the cross-sectional analysis proceeded with the longitudinal approach by the repetition of the “hedonic regression analysis” at four distinct time which includes “pre-planning, planning, construction, and operation phase of the light rail system”. The different results from the study has been able to include the implementation of the rail transit associated to the “proximity to the future rail corridor had a negative influence on home prices”. The main rationale is depicted with the presence of the “industrial land-use zones around the existing stations”. Despite of this, the comparison of the four-time periods has been started to react positively with the investments made in the in the operational phase. This consideration is suggested with the increased accessibility to the reliable transportation and attractiveness of the single-family houses in the proximity to the light rail stations. The pros have been predicted with disappearing of the light rail investment. The greater accessibility factor is seen to be discerned with increasing attractiveness in these areas (Camins-Esakov and Vandegrift 2016).
The study has been further able to introduce the relevant explanation stating the increase in the property values which are evident with the concept of the transit-oriented development which was introduced by “Charlotte land planning commission”. It is more likely that the commercial properties and the multiple-family houses have concentrated on the proximity to the light rail stations (Pan et al. 2014).
The important findings have been able to reveal that the consideration of the literature review has been revealed with the investments in the light rail transit which has been identified with various types of the positive effective on the values of the properties. It has been also interpreted that the “new fixed guideway transit investment is a twofold system”. Firstly, the transit system investment has improved the convenience for accessing the parts of the region from the station locations. Secondly the light rail accessibility has enhanced the overall attractiveness of the property and at the same time increasing the possibility of the redevelopment of the property in a more valuable and intense use. The various types of the impact of the light rail transit on the values of the property has been focused on several factors. The property value premiums due has significantly increased from “3% to 40%”. In addition to this, the property value premium in the ability to develop or redevelop the properties are dependent on the use of land and amount of development which can be permitted on the property. The important depictions of the study have been further able to focus on the various types of the important considerations which has been related to the “visual intrusion, noise and the association of rail right-of-way with industrial uses”.
It needs to be also assessed that the transit agencies have also observed the scope of property value increments fixed with the guideway investment. Henceforth, for increasing the effects of enhanced accessibility the transit agencies may plan rail lines for better serving the developed clusters. There has been also sufficient scope for orienting the operational plan for ensuring maximum accessibility in terms of the benefit by limiting the total number of stops and planning for increased speed based service. The transit agencies additionally have the scope for working alongside with the local jurisdictions for improving the accessibility in the station linked areas.
The different types of the improvements like increased safety, density of the streets and walkaways will be able to bring more positive “impact of light-rail transit on property values”. The increasing positive effects is depicted with the scope for the transit agencies in developing the sites which may be taken over by the different types of the joint venture activities. The other scope of the learnings has been considered with the “Local economic conditions, the mix of land uses, and the relative value of accessibility given the resident profile, urban morphology, and physical characteristics of the location” as per the value of the property. The depictions for the capability of the historical is seen to be minimum as per the data availability and the time constraints which needs to be taken into account with impacts on the property values prior to construction of light-rail transit and after the construction process is complete.
Camins-Esakov, J. and Vandegrift, D. (2016) ‘Impact of a light rail extension on residential property values’, Research in Transportation Economics. doi: 10.1016/j.retrec.2017.04.004.
Chen, Z. and Haynes, K. E. (2015) ‘Impact of high speed rail on housing values: An observation from the Beijing-Shanghai line’, Journal of Transport Geography, 43, pp. 91–100. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.01.012.
Clewlow, R. R., Sussman, J. M. and Balakrishnan, H. (2014) ‘The impact of high-speed rail and low-cost carriers on European air passenger traffic’, Transport Policy, 33, pp. 136–143. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.01.015.
D. Knowles, R. and Ferbrache, F. (2016) ‘Evaluation of wider economic impacts of light rail investment on cities’, Journal of Transport Geography, 54, pp. 430–439. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.09.002.
Dziauddin, M. F., Powe, N. and Alvanides, S. (2015) ‘Estimating the Effects of Light Rail Transit (LRT) System on Residential Property Values Using Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR)’, Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 8(1). doi: 10.1007/s12061-014-9117-z.
Ewing, R., Tian, G., Spain, A. and Goates, J. P. (2014) ‘Effects of Light-Rail Transit on Traffic in a Travel Corridor’, Journal of Public TransportationTransportation, 17(4), pp. 93–113. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.17.4.6.
Higgins, C. D., Ferguson, M. R. and Kanaroglou, P. S. (2014) ‘Light Rail and Land Use Change : Rail Transit ’ s Role in Reshaping and Revitalizing Cities’, Journal of Public Transportation, 17(2), pp. 93–112. doi: 10.5038/2375-0901.17.2.5.
Ma, L., Ye, R. and Titheridge, H. (2014) ‘Capitalization Effects of Rail Transit and BRT on on Residential Property Values in a Booming Economy – Evidence from Beijing’, Journal of the Transportation Research Board, pp. 139–148. doi: 10.3141/2451-16.
Mulley, C., Ma, L., Clifton, G., Yen, B. and Burke, M. (2016) ‘Residential property value impacts of proximity to transport infrastructure: An investigation of bus rapid transit and heavy rail networks in Brisbane, Australia’, Journal of Transport Geography, 54, pp. 41–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.05.010.
Pan, Q., Pan, H., Zhang, M. and Zhong, B. (2014) ‘Effects of Rail Transit on Residential Property Values: Comparison Study on the Rail Transit Lines in Houston, Texas, and Shanghai, China’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2453), p. pp 118–127. doi: 10.3141/2453-15.
Pilgram, C. A. and West, S. E. (2018) ‘Fading premiums: The effect of light rail on residential property values in Minneapolis, Minnesota’, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 69, pp. 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2017.12.008.
Salon, D., Wu, J. and Shewmake, S. (2014) ‘Impact of Bus Rapid Transit and Metro Rail on Property Values in Guangzhou, China’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2452, pp. 36–45. doi: 10.3141/2452-05.
Seo, K., Salon, D., Kuby, M. and Golub, A. (2018) ‘Hedonic modeling of commercial property values: distance decay from the links and nodes of rail and highway infrastructure’, Transportation, pp. 1–24. doi: 10.1007/s11116-018-9861-z.
Vermote, L., Macharis, C., Hollevoet, J. and Putman, K. (2014) ‘Participatory evaluation of regional light rail scenarios: A Flemish case on sustainable mobility and land-use’, Environmental Science and Policy, 37, pp. 101–120. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.08.013.
Werner, C. M., Brown, B. B., Tribby, C. P., Tharp, D., Flick, K., Miller, H. J., Smith, K. R. and Jensen, W. (2016) ‘Evaluating the attractiveness of a new light rail extension: Testing simple change and displacement change hypotheses’, Transport Policy, 45, pp. 15–23. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.09.003.
Xu, T., Zhang, M. and Aditjandra, P. T. (2016) ‘The impact of urban rail transit on commercial property value: New evidence from Wuhan, China’, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 91, pp. 223–235. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.026.
Yu, H., Pang, H. and Zhang, M. (2017) ‘Value-added effects of transit-oriented development: The impact of urban rail on commercial property values with consideration of spatial heterogeneity’, Papers in Regional Science. doi: 10.1111/pirs.12304.