Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land

Expand Messages
  • Graham Fletcher
    Javier, Are you aware of: http://www.rics.org/downloads/research_reports/land_value.pdf This may be of some interest. Best wishes, Graham ... From: Javier
    Message 1 of 11 , Aug 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Javier,
       
      Are you aware of:
       
       
       
      This may be of some interest.
       
      Best wishes,
       
      Graham
       

      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:33 AM
      Subject: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land

      Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
      request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
      special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
      value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
      will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
      literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.

      Javier Pacheco
      ITC UPLA.2 Student
      Enschede, The Netherlands




      The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
      Consult at: http://wTransport.org
      To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
      To subscribe:  WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com 
      To unsubscribe:  WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Todd Alexander Litman
      See the report DOES PUBLIC TRANSIT RAISE SITE VALUES AROUND ITS STOPS ENOUGH TO PAY FOR ITSELF (WERE THE VALUE CAPTURED)? by Jeffery J. Smith, posted at our
      Message 2 of 11 , Aug 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        See the report "DOES PUBLIC TRANSIT RAISE SITE VALUES AROUND ITS STOPS
        ENOUGH TO PAY FOR ITSELF (WERE THE VALUE CAPTURED)?" by Jeffery J. Smith,
        posted at our website (www.vtpi.org/smith.htm), which summarizes
        considerable literature on the effects of public transit on property
        values. Also see the "Transit Evaluation" (www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm62.htm),
        "Economic Development" (www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm54.htm) and "Land Use
        Evaluation (www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm104.htm) chapters of our Online TDM
        Encyclopedia, which discuss some of the transport, land use and economic
        impacts of public transit.

        Please let me know if you have any questions or comments about this
        information, or if you find anything to add.


        Best wishes,
        -Todd Litman


        At 08:33 AM 6/12/2003 +0000, Javier Pacheco Raguz wrote:
        >Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
        >request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
        >special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
        >value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
        >will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
        >literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.
        >
        >Javier Pacheco
        >ITC UPLA.2 Student
        >Enschede, The Netherlands
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
        >Consult at: http://wTransport.org
        >To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
        >To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


        Sincerely,
        Todd Litman, Director
        Victoria Transport Policy Institute
        "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
        1250 Rudlin Street
        Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada
        Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560
        Email: litman@...
        Website: http://www.vtpi.org
      • Lee Schipper
        I think the issue is the other way around: How much does a given size home cost in a dense neighborhood, in a sprawling neighborhood, in an older development,
        Message 3 of 11 , Aug 9, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          I think the issue is the other way around: How much does a given size
          home cost in a dense neighborhood, in a sprawling neighborhood, in an
          older development, in a newer development, as a function of the location
          of that neighborhood, its local population density, its jobs to housing
          ratio etc? Then, if good transit service is establish, how much do
          housing costs rise (if at all); conversely, how do housing costs vary as
          a function of distance from a good transit line.
          On a very practical basis, 150 sq meters in Georgetown, Washington DC
          costs about twice to three times what it costs i Cleveland Park (two
          long metro stops away) and four times what it costs in Tenley town. The
          latter two actually have metro stops, Georgetown is 300 to 2000 meters
          from the nearest Metro station (buses in DC are a slow burning
          disaster). Housing close in to the suburb of Bethesda, which has good
          Metro and bus service, costs more than housing farther from the main
          metro stop, but how much more.
          Could it simply be that consumers figured out that the farther out you
          go, the more land and home you get for a unit of investment, and, aided
          by US policies that encourage borrowing for home ownership, make a
          tradeoff of a little more in cheap fuel and insurance in exchange for a
          lot more land? Could it also be that car insurance is cheaper in the
          low-density suburbs than it is in the higher density city core (it is)?

          In the end I think we paid $50K extra to be two blocks from Cleveland
          Park Metro; lots of options 500-2000 meters farther away offerred more
          house for less money. Since I cycle to work those extra 2000 meters,
          which would have been a long uphill grind, would have been a real ordeal
          day after day. But the hill I do have to climb is worth it, since I
          could not afford to live in Georgetown (where I rented) and pay around
          $1mn for a large three bedroom home rather than $780K for a much larger
          5bdr home (yes, with the study etc all the home is filled up already). I
          could have lived i the farther burbs for half as much, had a larger lot,
          driven or taken public transport 45 minutes each way, paid to go to a
          gym rather than cycled.. You all get my drift.

          That may be the trade off. Why do the various reports on sprawl in the
          US focus only on transport costs and fuel, but consistently omit all the
          other characteristics AND COSTS of residential location? Life is more
          than one-dimensional, is it not?

          >>> john.holtzclaw@... 08/01/03 05:08PM >>>

          Hi Javier,

          We have information on that in the U.S. on our website,
          http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
          Go to Transportation; then Articles and Research; then Smart Growth --
          As
          Seen From the Air
          or How Compact Neighborhoods Affect Modal Choice







          John Holtzclaw
          415-977-5534
          John.Holtzclaw@...
          sprawl and transportation action -- http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
          This View of Density -- www.sflcv.org/density


          "Javier Pacheco Raguz" <jpraguz@...>

          06/12/2003 01:33 AM



          Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
          request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
          special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
          value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
          will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
          literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.

          Javier Pacheco
          ITC UPLA.2 Student
          Enschede, The Netherland




          ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

          The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
          Consult at: http://wTransport.org
          To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
          To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
          To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Tramsol@aol.com
          Metroland (1920-1930 London) Glasgow suburban network c 1870 Southern (& LBSC/LSWR pre 1923) electrification - again dominant development ca 1930. Indeed the
          Message 4 of 11 , Aug 9, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Metroland (1920-1930 London) Glasgow suburban network c 1870 Southern (&
            LBSC/LSWR pre 1923) electrification - again dominant development ca 1930.

            Indeed the effects might even be tracable back to Shillibeers omnibuses,
            expanding the commute catchment for London or fly-boats on the canals of the
            preceding century.

            Dave Holladay
            Glasgow
          • Michael Yeates
            There is also more to this ... using some Australian info. 1. Often the price of a site per se reflects not only the current but also any potential development
            Message 5 of 11 , Aug 25, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              There is also more to this ... using some Australian info.

              1. Often the price of a site per se reflects not only the current but also
              any potential development rights so people may be buying both a current
              utility as well as a future redevelopment option ... ie in the second case,
              gaining a speculative windfall on the greater cost achieveable from the land
              value only without any betterment tax ... incidentally in doing so, the
              complete "cost" of the existing building changes from being an asset to a
              liability or cost simply on that decision whether to redevelop or not.

              2. The other issue is the view that good public transport and walking and
              cycling is not necessarily linked to housing and population density ie that
              good other-than-car alternatives can be provided at suburban densities ... I
              would suggest that the reason that these facilities seem expensive is that
              roads and the real full costs thereof are grossly underpriced eg one is the
              cost impacts of children no longer able or allowed to walk or cycle to
              school but how do we price the social and educational disbenefits? It does
              however require a different type of suburban road network to that
              traditionally designed buy Oz and US traffic and subdivision engineers. So
              what also tends to happen here in some areas is an inverse relationship
              where in some parts of Australia, poorer people pay less for houses at the
              outer edges of the older areas but then pay much more per dollar income per
              household member for car use and have a much poorer or almost useless public
              transport service.

              Cities and urbanising areas are very complex ... and very diverse ... almost
              defying generalised rules... but the "trends" are pretty clear...!

              Paul Mees' book "A Very Public Solution" is worth a read on this topic...

              Michael Yeates
              Brisbane Oz

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Lee Schipper" <SCHIPPER@...>
              To: <WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2003 4:57 AM
              Subject: Re: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land


              > I think the issue is the other way around: How much does a given size
              > home cost in a dense neighborhood, in a sprawling neighborhood, in an
              > older development, in a newer development, as a function of the location
              > of that neighborhood, its local population density, its jobs to housing
              > ratio etc? Then, if good transit service is establish, how much do
              > housing costs rise (if at all); conversely, how do housing costs vary as
              > a function of distance from a good transit line.
              > On a very practical basis, 150 sq meters in Georgetown, Washington DC
              > costs about twice to three times what it costs i Cleveland Park (two
              > long metro stops away) and four times what it costs in Tenley town. The
              > latter two actually have metro stops, Georgetown is 300 to 2000 meters
              > from the nearest Metro station (buses in DC are a slow burning
              > disaster). Housing close in to the suburb of Bethesda, which has good
              > Metro and bus service, costs more than housing farther from the main
              > metro stop, but how much more.
              > Could it simply be that consumers figured out that the farther out you
              > go, the more land and home you get for a unit of investment, and, aided
              > by US policies that encourage borrowing for home ownership, make a
              > tradeoff of a little more in cheap fuel and insurance in exchange for a
              > lot more land? Could it also be that car insurance is cheaper in the
              > low-density suburbs than it is in the higher density city core (it is)?
              >
              > In the end I think we paid $50K extra to be two blocks from Cleveland
              > Park Metro; lots of options 500-2000 meters farther away offerred more
              > house for less money. Since I cycle to work those extra 2000 meters,
              > which would have been a long uphill grind, would have been a real ordeal
              > day after day. But the hill I do have to climb is worth it, since I
              > could not afford to live in Georgetown (where I rented) and pay around
              > $1mn for a large three bedroom home rather than $780K for a much larger
              > 5bdr home (yes, with the study etc all the home is filled up already). I
              > could have lived i the farther burbs for half as much, had a larger lot,
              > driven or taken public transport 45 minutes each way, paid to go to a
              > gym rather than cycled.. You all get my drift.
              >
              > That may be the trade off. Why do the various reports on sprawl in the
              > US focus only on transport costs and fuel, but consistently omit all the
              > other characteristics AND COSTS of residential location? Life is more
              > than one-dimensional, is it not?
              >
              > >>> john.holtzclaw@... 08/01/03 05:08PM >>>
              >
              > Hi Javier,
              >
              > We have information on that in the U.S. on our website,
              > http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
              > Go to Transportation; then Articles and Research; then Smart Growth --
              > As
              > Seen From the Air
              > or How Compact Neighborhoods Affect Modal Choice
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > John Holtzclaw
              > 415-977-5534
              > John.Holtzclaw@...
              > sprawl and transportation action -- http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
              > This View of Density -- www.sflcv.org/density
              >
              >
              > "Javier Pacheco Raguz" <jpraguz@...>
              >
              > 06/12/2003 01:33 AM
              >
              >
              >
              > Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
              > request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
              > special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
              > value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
              > will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
              > literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.
              >
              > Javier Pacheco
              > ITC UPLA.2 Student
              > Enschede, The Netherland
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              >
              > The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
              > Consult at: http://wTransport.org
              > To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
              > To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
              > Consult at: http://wTransport.org
              > To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
              > To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Wetzel Dave
              What you have identified is not the difference in the cost of a home - but the difference in the value of the land on which the home sits. Of course you are
              Message 6 of 11 , Aug 27, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                What you have identified is not the difference in the cost of a home - but
                the difference in the value of the land on which the home sits.

                Of course you are right, transport is not the only factor to give land its
                value - transport is just one of many influences.

                However, what we do know is that the individual landowner does not create
                land value. It is the community's demand for land in a specific location
                that gives land its value. If Government's collected this location benefit
                as a levy or a tax on site values, they could pay for their services and
                reduce taxes on trade and incomes.

                Let me know if any reader wants more information (appropriate web-sites
                etc.)

                Dave

                Dave Wetzel
                Vice-chair, TfL.
                Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street.
                London. SW1H 0TL. UK.
                Tel 020 7941 4200


                -----Original Message-----
                From: Lee Schipper [mailto:SCHIPPER@...]
                Sent: 09 August 2003 19:57
                To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land


                I think the issue is the other way around: How much does a given size
                home cost in a dense neighborhood, in a sprawling neighborhood, in an
                older development, in a newer development, as a function of the location
                of that neighborhood, its local population density, its jobs to housing
                ratio etc? Then, if good transit service is establish, how much do
                housing costs rise (if at all); conversely, how do housing costs vary as
                a function of distance from a good transit line.
                On a very practical basis, 150 sq meters in Georgetown, Washington DC
                costs about twice to three times what it costs i Cleveland Park (two
                long metro stops away) and four times what it costs in Tenley town. The
                latter two actually have metro stops, Georgetown is 300 to 2000 meters
                from the nearest Metro station (buses in DC are a slow burning
                disaster). Housing close in to the suburb of Bethesda, which has good
                Metro and bus service, costs more than housing farther from the main
                metro stop, but how much more.
                Could it simply be that consumers figured out that the farther out you
                go, the more land and home you get for a unit of investment, and, aided
                by US policies that encourage borrowing for home ownership, make a
                tradeoff of a little more in cheap fuel and insurance in exchange for a
                lot more land? Could it also be that car insurance is cheaper in the
                low-density suburbs than it is in the higher density city core (it is)?

                In the end I think we paid $50K extra to be two blocks from Cleveland
                Park Metro; lots of options 500-2000 meters farther away offerred more
                house for less money. Since I cycle to work those extra 2000 meters,
                which would have been a long uphill grind, would have been a real ordeal
                day after day. But the hill I do have to climb is worth it, since I
                could not afford to live in Georgetown (where I rented) and pay around
                $1mn for a large three bedroom home rather than $780K for a much larger
                5bdr home (yes, with the study etc all the home is filled up already). I
                could have lived i the farther burbs for half as much, had a larger lot,
                driven or taken public transport 45 minutes each way, paid to go to a
                gym rather than cycled.. You all get my drift.

                That may be the trade off. Why do the various reports on sprawl in the
                US focus only on transport costs and fuel, but consistently omit all the
                other characteristics AND COSTS of residential location? Life is more
                than one-dimensional, is it not?

                >>> john.holtzclaw@... 08/01/03 05:08PM >>>

                Hi Javier,

                We have information on that in the U.S. on our website,
                http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
                Go to Transportation; then Articles and Research; then Smart Growth --
                As
                Seen From the Air
                or How Compact Neighborhoods Affect Modal Choice







                John Holtzclaw
                415-977-5534
                John.Holtzclaw@...
                sprawl and transportation action -- http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
                This View of Density -- www.sflcv.org/density


                "Javier Pacheco Raguz" <jpraguz@...>

                06/12/2003 01:33 AM



                Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
                request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
                special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
                value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
                will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
                literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.

                Javier Pacheco
                ITC UPLA.2 Student
                Enschede, The Netherland




                ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
                Consult at: http://wTransport.org
                To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
                Consult at: http://wTransport.org
                To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                ***********************************************************************************
                The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.

                If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@....

                This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
                ***********************************************************************************
              • Chris Bradshaw
                This is a very important topic to discuss here. I think it is a general rule that location costs more housing-wise, but the buyer gets benefits that, at
                Message 7 of 11 , Aug 31, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  This is a very important topic to discuss here.

                  I think it is a general rule that "location" costs more housing-wise,
                  but the buyer gets benefits that, at least to him, appear to be equal to
                  or better than the higher margin.

                  "Location" refers to both being near that which is desirable, and NOT
                  being near to that which is undesirable. Those marketing the suburbs
                  have always emphasized the latter (crime, street traffic, noise, poor
                  schools, lower-income neighbours), while treating the longer distances
                  to desirable services as being very easy to overcome (owning/using one
                  or more cars).

                  Transit is one of the factors that are part of the positive side of
                  "location," however, one does not want to have to use it for more than a
                  narrow range of trips (e.g., commuting), while needing the full range of
                  services within walking distance (clustered and along a fully walkable
                  street).

                  All of suburbia in our city has transit, but only for those residents
                  limiting their use to commuting (and having regular 9-5 jobs located
                  along the peak-hour routes, wanting to avoid transfers) rely on it.
                  Only those living in these areas unwillingly (youth, live-in help,
                  dependent seniors) will use the off-peak transit service for other kinds
                  of trips.

                  Most New Urbanism development is of this latter category, since they
                  lack internal services and are located too far from where the true urban
                  "fabric" of main streets and mixed uses ends. For that reason, they
                  still have as much yard space given over to the owners' cars, but this
                  space is at the rear, along a laneway, with the house pushed forward to
                  the street.

                  What our industry needs to do is to educate housing consumers (and
                  government officials and developers) to the following:

                  1. Walking is everyone's favourite mode, and the destinations which can
                  be walked to is at the highest level of "location." There is growing
                  awareness that, although driving is seen as superior to transit, it is
                  significantly inferior to walking.

                  2. Housing price is related to transportation costs; the two must be
                  considered as a unit. "Location" reduces the amount of "fleet" the
                  household needs, and the distance each vehicle is driven. The
                  perception (and much of the reality) is that car-ownership is almost as
                  high in high-location areas as poor-location areas (see also next).

                  3. People facing low driving needs cannot, in today's market, buy a
                  "fraction" of a car; they can only buy older cars (I have found,
                  although I have seen no research, that the distance a vehicle is driven
                  is in reverse proportion to its age; with age, it becomes less reliable
                  and less "presentable"; also, with age, the driving costs shift from
                  fixed to variable, gaining some of the costing advantages of
                  carsharing). [One way to offer carsharing to those owning older cars is
                  to ask, "What is better, owning all of a partial car, or owning part of
                  a whole car?"]

                  4. Living in high-location areas requires a smaller house and yard,
                  since there are more nearby communal areas, e.g., parks, churches,
                  schools, coffee shops, bars (cf.: Oldenberg, R. _The Great Good
                  Place_). These provide not only out-of-house social spaces, but the
                  higher density makes sharing things easier. A walkable area can also
                  reduce expenses for health clubs and reduce the time adults spend
                  driving other household members. With carsharing, the "fleet" can be
                  reduced, further reducing the house's need to provide indoor and outdoor
                  amenities and space for vehicles.

                  Ironically, as consumers start getting this point, the first symptom
                  will be that the location-sensitive price differential for housing will
                  actually increase. The second one should be that those in low-location
                  neighbourhoods will organize to "invite in" -- through a neighbourhood
                  plan -- the services and employment they lack. They will need to "tame"
                  their streets to attract the growing number of entrepreneurs who are
                  interested in operating small-scale main-street businesses.

                  Chris Bradshaw
                  Vrtucar, Ottawa
                • Wetzel Dave
                  Michael - Sorry it s taken me so long to come back to you. I agree with your observations. To summarise: the sale price of a site is dependent on three
                  Message 8 of 11 , Sep 16, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Michael -
                    Sorry it's taken me so long to come back to you.

                    I agree with your observations.

                    To summarise: the sale price of a site is dependent on three factors:

                    1. The optimum use that the new owner can make of the site.
                    2. The permitted use allowed by the community/planning authority/restrictive
                    covenant etc.
                    3. Any hope value that the seller can add and the purchaser is willing to
                    pay.

                    Improved access (public transport or new roads) adds to 1 above.

                    Thus, landowners are creaming off the location value of their sites which
                    they do nothing to create.

                    If Governments were to tax land values to pay for transport then a virtuous
                    circle is created.
                    The tax would need to be an annual levy on the rental value of each site.
                    The value would be assessed on the optimum permitted use of the site
                    ignoring the value of buildings or improvements.
                    Thus, people receiving the financial benefit of a valuable location make a
                    contribution to the rest of the community.
                    Unlike other taxes, a land value tax is cheap to collect and difficult to
                    avoid.
                    Owners will make better use of their sites and society will avoid urban
                    sprawl.
                    The property cycle will be evened out.

                    Therefor in your second example, the land tax on the owners of land occupied
                    by the poorer people living out of town will be less.
                    However, if a new motorway or mass transit is built, reducing their
                    transport costs, then both the land value, and the land tax would increase.
                    If this location benefit value is not taxed, then landowners will collect
                    the benefit as they increase their rents to poor people after their
                    transport costs have been reduced.

                    Happy to supply more information if required.

                    Dave

                    Dave Wetzel
                    Vice-Chair
                    Transport for London
                    42-50 Victoria Street. London.
                    SW1H 0TL. UK

                    Tel: 020 7941 4200


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Michael Yeates [mailto:michaelm@...]
                    Sent: 25 August 2003 14:07
                    To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land


                    There is also more to this ... using some Australian info.

                    1. Often the price of a site per se reflects not only the current but also
                    any potential development rights so people may be buying both a current
                    utility as well as a future redevelopment option ... ie in the second case,
                    gaining a speculative windfall on the greater cost achieveable from the land
                    value only without any betterment tax ... incidentally in doing so, the
                    complete "cost" of the existing building changes from being an asset to a
                    liability or cost simply on that decision whether to redevelop or not.

                    2. The other issue is the view that good public transport and walking and
                    cycling is not necessarily linked to housing and population density ie that
                    good other-than-car alternatives can be provided at suburban densities ... I
                    would suggest that the reason that these facilities seem expensive is that
                    roads and the real full costs thereof are grossly underpriced eg one is the
                    cost impacts of children no longer able or allowed to walk or cycle to
                    school but how do we price the social and educational disbenefits? It does
                    however require a different type of suburban road network to that
                    traditionally designed buy Oz and US traffic and subdivision engineers. So
                    what also tends to happen here in some areas is an inverse relationship
                    where in some parts of Australia, poorer people pay less for houses at the
                    outer edges of the older areas but then pay much more per dollar income per
                    household member for car use and have a much poorer or almost useless public
                    transport service.

                    Cities and urbanising areas are very complex ... and very diverse ... almost
                    defying generalised rules... but the "trends" are pretty clear...!

                    Paul Mees' book "A Very Public Solution" is worth a read on this topic...

                    Michael Yeates
                    Brisbane Oz

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Lee Schipper" <SCHIPPER@...>
                    To: <WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2003 4:57 AM
                    Subject: Re: [WorldTransport] About transport impacts over urban land


                    > I think the issue is the other way around: How much does a given size
                    > home cost in a dense neighborhood, in a sprawling neighborhood, in an
                    > older development, in a newer development, as a function of the location
                    > of that neighborhood, its local population density, its jobs to housing
                    > ratio etc? Then, if good transit service is establish, how much do
                    > housing costs rise (if at all); conversely, how do housing costs vary as
                    > a function of distance from a good transit line.
                    > On a very practical basis, 150 sq meters in Georgetown, Washington DC
                    > costs about twice to three times what it costs i Cleveland Park (two
                    > long metro stops away) and four times what it costs in Tenley town. The
                    > latter two actually have metro stops, Georgetown is 300 to 2000 meters
                    > from the nearest Metro station (buses in DC are a slow burning
                    > disaster). Housing close in to the suburb of Bethesda, which has good
                    > Metro and bus service, costs more than housing farther from the main
                    > metro stop, but how much more.
                    > Could it simply be that consumers figured out that the farther out you
                    > go, the more land and home you get for a unit of investment, and, aided
                    > by US policies that encourage borrowing for home ownership, make a
                    > tradeoff of a little more in cheap fuel and insurance in exchange for a
                    > lot more land? Could it also be that car insurance is cheaper in the
                    > low-density suburbs than it is in the higher density city core (it is)?
                    >
                    > In the end I think we paid $50K extra to be two blocks from Cleveland
                    > Park Metro; lots of options 500-2000 meters farther away offerred more
                    > house for less money. Since I cycle to work those extra 2000 meters,
                    > which would have been a long uphill grind, would have been a real ordeal
                    > day after day. But the hill I do have to climb is worth it, since I
                    > could not afford to live in Georgetown (where I rented) and pay around
                    > $1mn for a large three bedroom home rather than $780K for a much larger
                    > 5bdr home (yes, with the study etc all the home is filled up already). I
                    > could have lived i the farther burbs for half as much, had a larger lot,
                    > driven or taken public transport 45 minutes each way, paid to go to a
                    > gym rather than cycled.. You all get my drift.
                    >
                    > That may be the trade off. Why do the various reports on sprawl in the
                    > US focus only on transport costs and fuel, but consistently omit all the
                    > other characteristics AND COSTS of residential location? Life is more
                    > than one-dimensional, is it not?
                    >
                    > >>> john.holtzclaw@... 08/01/03 05:08PM >>>
                    >
                    > Hi Javier,
                    >
                    > We have information on that in the U.S. on our website,
                    > http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
                    > Go to Transportation; then Articles and Research; then Smart Growth --
                    > As
                    > Seen From the Air
                    > or How Compact Neighborhoods Affect Modal Choice
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > John Holtzclaw
                    > 415-977-5534
                    > John.Holtzclaw@...
                    > sprawl and transportation action -- http://www.SierraClub.org/sprawl
                    > This View of Density -- www.sflcv.org/density
                    >
                    >
                    > "Javier Pacheco Raguz" <jpraguz@...>
                    >
                    > 06/12/2003 01:33 AM
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Hello everybody, I am glad to meet you all. I would like to make a
                    > request for information about the impacts of transportation (with
                    > special focus on mass transit systems) over urban land in terms of
                    > value, density, pollution, etc. I am doing research about it and I
                    > will be thankful if somebody can provide me some tips about related
                    > literature. Thanks in advance for your kind help.
                    >
                    > Javier Pacheco
                    > ITC UPLA.2 Student
                    > Enschede, The Netherland
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                    >
                    > The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
                    > Consult at: http://wTransport.org
                    > To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                    > To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    > To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
                    > Consult at: http://wTransport.org
                    > To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                    > To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    > To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >




                    The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
                    Consult at: http://wTransport.org
                    To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
                    To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                    ***********************************************************************************
                    The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.

                    If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@....

                    This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
                    ***********************************************************************************
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.