Research: Low-Income Housing Doesn’t Depress Neighboring Home Values

Research via Trulia:

The bottom line for NIMBYs who fear that property values will take a hit when a low-income housing project locates nearby is that their anxiety is largely unfounded – at least in cities where housing is either expensive or in short supply.

The research looked at 20 of the nation’s least affordable housing markets, and compared changes in home value in neighborhoods where low-income housing was built, relative to neighboring areas which did not add low-income housing.

Homes within 2,000 and 4,000 feet of low-income housing developments in San Jose, Ca. Source: Trulia

Homes within 2,000 and 4,000 feet of low-income housing developments in San Jose, Ca.
Source: Trulia

Such statistics may be useful to reference when evaluating proposals to add Low Income Housing.

VTA Board Approve Plan to Redesign Transit Network to Improve Ridership

On November 18, the VTA Board of Directors directed staff to begin designing a new transit network which will provide a greater emphasis on ridership over coverage. This is a critical step in the VTA Next Network project which has been in process throughout 2016 and will culminate in a new bus / light rail network in 2017.

Improved Service Frequency

This represents a big step forward for VTA, which has lagged behind comparable transit agencies for more than a decade. The goal is to encourage people to ride transit by making transit services for most people more convenient. This is to be achieved by a network of bus routes which run at least every 15 minutes. Prospective passengers can simply walk to a bus stop with an assurance that they will soon get a ride, without the hassle of planning their trips around timetables. The tradeoff is that in order to provide more frequent service on heavily used lines, overall network coverage in areas with lower ridership will be pared back or removed altogether. In Next Network terms, VTA is moving from a current orientation of 70% service, 30% coverage to a network of 85% service, 15% coverage.

network70

Concept: 70% Ridership, 30% Coverage

network90

Concept: 90% Ridership, 10% Coverage

The above are “concept networks” from the VTA Next Network site. The left is “70% ridership” which means more coverage with infrequent lines, while the right is “90% ridership.” The color key is:

  • Thick Orange — Extra Frequent Rapid: limited stops and 7.5 minute peak frequency
  • Red — Frequent: 15 minutes or better
  • Blue — every half hour
  • Green — hourly service

With the board directing VTA to pursue 85% ridership, one can expect a sparser map with more red lines.

Mobility Concerns

Green Caltrain’s Adina Levin summarized community and board concerns over how to provide mobility to those who might lose transit coverage:

Cutting coverage harms people whose service is cut, especially youth, seniors, disabled, and very low-income people who don’t have other transportation choices.  According to federal law, transit agencies have a legal obligation to provide paratransit service only on routes serviced by fixed-route bus service. If the bus route goes away, so does the paratransit service.

At the meeting, several community members from Palo Alto came and raised concerns about the 88 route. Penny Ellson of Palo Alto commented that the route serves a number of schools, and was a key factor in the decision to locate senior housing.

To alleviate impacts on disabled people, VTA staff recommended potentially keeping paratransit routes even where buses no longer ran. And in response to concerns raised by communities that would lose low-ridership routes, staff recommended options including block grants to cities to run local shuttle service, and experimentation with transportation network services such as Lyft and Uber, which might be able to provide access at a lower per-ride cost than fixed route buses, and using excess paratransit capacity for on-demand service.

The Lyft/Uber option sounded compelling to board members including San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo and Council Member Johnny Khamis. Board chair Supervisor Cindy Chavez expressed concern about potentially undermining public transit. The future economic viability of services like Lyft and Uber is also questionable.

Improving Connections

A critical factor in the success of a frequent-service network, is the ability to connect between bus routes and between the bus system and other transit services. Green Caltrain noted that this was also a concern of the VTA board:

Board members including Sunnyvale Mayor Hendricks and Santa Clara Vice-Mayor O’Neill strongly supported the recommendation to reduce the cost of transfers, including transfers to BART and Caltrain. A board member suggested that rail agencies with higher farebox recovery provide VTA with financial compensation for providing feeder service.

See Also

VTA Board of Directors Meeting Details

Next Steps

  • December 8, 2016: VTA Board of Directors Meeting–Agenda will be posted to VTA’s website 72-hours prior.
  • January 5, 2017: VTA Board of Directors Meeting–Draft transit plan will be presented to the Board.
  • January – February 2017: Public Outreach Period–Draft transit plan will be released for public review and input.
  • April 2017: VTA Board of Directors will adopt a final plan
  • Fall 2017: BART extension and VTA Next Network begin operations

Sunnyvale Resident: Daniel Howard

[NOTE: This was originally a “Hello World” post written to kick off the site. This is not the intended format for a resident profile. -DH]

My name is Danny Howard. I grew up in Chicago, graduated from UIUC, and first moved to Mountain View in 1999, one of the ever streaming horde of ambitious kids who keep moving out here to pursue a high-tech career.

The Silicon Valley is a great place, blessed with opportunities and great weather. But it is very challenging to live out here: the rent keeps going up, the traffic is insane, the public transit system is pathetic, mortgages are out of reach, and you never know when the bubble will pop and leave you unemployed. In 2002, I ran out of opportunities, loaded all I had left in the car, and headed back East . . .

Our House, Northern Elevation, circa 2012 Crayon on Placemat

Our Sunnyvale Home and Family, Northern Elevation, circa 2012

In time I returned to the Bay Area. My career stabilized. I married. In 2012, thanks in part to the Mortgage Crisis, we were able to afford a home on the North side of Sunnyvale. Things are working well for my young family, but I eat my lunch with those ambitious kids who are confronting the challenges of life out here. For so many it is abundantly clear the Valley has no room for them to settle down. Their futures lie in remote, affordable cities, and they avoid becoming emotionally involved with the community they presently call home.

My friends and colleagues are some of the most ambitious, capable people on the planet. They live here–for now–but for their own emotional well-being they alienate themselves from our communities because they see they must leave. This breaks my heart and it is a tremendous loss for the rest of us.

Earlier this year I received the city newsletter, which advertised prominently for volunteers for Sunnyvale Boards and Commissions. I have long been interested in urban planning so I applied to the Planning Commission. I also became engaged with the Maude Avenue Bicycle Lane project. Consequently, I have become more involved in the civic process. I have published notes and articles on my personal web site, but I think these ideas deserve a home of their own. If this site can serve as a forum to promote ideas to improve life in the Silicon Valley, that broken heart of mine will know some joy.