Why Santa Monica’s real estate market’s doing just fine: People are willing to pay more for the privilege of walking more.
Okay — Perhaps Santa Monica’s gotten other attractive features people are willing to pay for, i.e. proximity to the beach. But apparently, people are willing to pay $4,000 to $34,000 more for above average walkability versus just average walkability. That’s what a study called Walking the Walk (PDF) found when it mashed up WalkScore numbers with home values and corrected for “hedonic regression,” a.k.a. other factors (like age, house sizes, and proximity to urban center) that might make people pay more to live in a particular ‘hood (via Grist). The study was put together by a group called CEOs for Cities, self-described as “a national network of urban leaders dedicated to building and sustaining the next generation of great American cities.”
At Grist, Katharine Wroth writes about the study: “For me, the question is: Should we have to pay more for the privilege of being able to walk to a grocery store or school or post office or local pub?” Her answer seems to be a qualified yes — that walkable neighborhoods are worth valuing, but that policies that make walkable neighborhoods more widely available should also be pursued.
For me, the question is: Does it actually COST more to live in a walkable neighborhood? Because if you move to a walkable neighborhood, you could very well be able to go happily carfree — and the savings from that could make up for the higher rent or mortgage. As Metro recently reported: “According to The American Public Transportation Association (APTA), L.A. County residents who ride public transportation can save $10,015 per year, or $835 per month by taking public transportation and living with one less car.”
With Santa Monica’s home prices crazy as they are, I’m not sure de-car-ing alone would let most of us actually become homeowners here — but I’m willing to bet many would-be beachside community residents would able to afford the rent here if they ditched their cars!
While de-car-ing in a pedestrian-friendly ‘hood can be quite pleasurable, Streetsblog points out that de-car-ing’s not so fun in the ‘burbs by linking to a bunch of blogs that point out the real social challenges to taking advantage of a car-free lifestyle if you live in a ‘hood that’s car-centric.
Curious as to how Santa Monica’s promoting walkability and — extrapolating from Walk the Walk study — pushing up property values? Well, anyone who’s driven, biked, or walked all the way down Wilshire knows that once you get into Santa Monica, pretty much every street corner has a pedestrian crosswalk painted on the road. That’s just one way “Santa Monica is controlling traffic flow by the way they design their streets,” as Streetsblog LA points out. “They slow down traffic in many places and speed it up in a few others which will encourage automobile traffic away from the more pedestrian friendly areas.”
Earlier:
>> Walk Score: My ‘hood’s more walkable than yours
>> Discover One-Mile-Radius Living
Well, I don’t know about home buyers, but my partner and I definitely pay more to live in a walkable neighborhood and we’re completely happy with that decision. When we moved to LA we were deciding between Palms (still has bus lines, but less convenient) vs. Brentwood. Brentwood won and we’ve found that we can share a car and we barely ever use it. Living walking distance from Wilshire, Sunset and Santa Monica Blvd means that I can bus almost anywhere in the city, but we have almost everything we need within a one mile radius of our apartment.
I find it curious that the suburbs are our model of living, because it would be so much easier for elderly people to live in an apartment like we do. No need to drive, easy access to everything, less isolation.
Comment by Rachel (Heart of Light) — August 24, 2009 @ 4:09 pm
Yesterday there was a documentary on PBS about the land use laws in and around Portland. It covered many of the benefits and problems of their decisions, which include making the area in the city increasingly expensive to live, even if it is possible to move around without a car. One result was that lower income individuals are pushed further and further out from the city center. While some lower income housing was being developed in the city, I am somewhat skeptical of some lower income housing and how it is used. After seeing a documentary on Skid Row where a guy talks about how he had $60 a month rent and that he has no intent on moving out of that place, it makes me unsure of how to deal with these sorts of issues.
Another problem is that not everyone needs the same things in life. There are the basic needs of food, water and shelter, but in terms of noise, light pollution, interactions with people vs. interactions with animals/plants and entertainment people have very different tolerances and needs. Assuming that all of those needs can be calculated by a walkscore is rather simplistic (especially since some rather far out things qualify for some of the walk-score categories). Some of my best walking experiences have happened in areas with some of the worst walkscores and I would have never paid the price of being hit by a car like I would in some areas with a very low walkscore.
Comment by M — August 24, 2009 @ 4:32 pm
I just find it somewhat sad that one has to PAY MORE. If only there a way to incorporate a greener lifestyle for all social classes. But, as you said in the title – it is a privilege.
Comment by Haley — August 24, 2009 @ 4:38 pm
When I moved from a house in a Dallas suburb to an apartment in NW DC, I started paying about $250 more for housing (for 1/3 the space). However, that is offset by the fact that I sold my car so I save on insurance, car payment, repairs, gas, etc. Just the insurance and car payment were over $350 per month, and my metro expenses started at $25 a month out of pre-tax money. My current job is farther away, so my metro costs have gone up a lot but are still out of pre-tax money.
I really enjoy being able to walk most places, and I don’t mind living in a smaller space to make that happen. I’m looking into biking to work to cut my metro costs a bit and get away from the throngs of people.
I know that there are a lot of places that are just not walkable, but I do think that the cost difference between walkable and non-walkable ‘hoods will decrease over time if people show a desire for it. A lot of how we got here was through car companies deliberate actions, so it won’t be easy to undo. Rebuilding infrastructure is harder than tearing it down in the first place.
I was having a conversation with someone recently and she was giving all of the reasons why she NEEDED a car despite living in a metro-accessible apartment in a dense city. I finally got her to at least be able to see that she has a car because she wants one which I think is a big step. It isn’t bad for people to have something just because they want it, but we can’t change minds if they can’t even see where the decision originates. What was very interesting to me is how many of her reasons had to do with safety. I think that is a big problem in the minds of many people. I try to explain that statistically speaking, you are safer if you are walking or on a train/bus than if you are driving but people have internalized the dangers of being in a car so much that they are invisible. There is a heightened perception of the dangers from being mugged or otherwise assaulted on the street.
Comment by Erica — August 25, 2009 @ 10:14 am
Rachel — V. much agree with you, especially about the elderly perhaps benefiting more from living in denser areas. This is a point I tried to bring up in my post about Prop 12, which gave benefits to veterans for buying houses (presumably more likely to be in the ‘burbs) but not for renting apartments….
M — I hear you with different people wanting different levels of social interaction / interaction w/ nature, etc. in life. That said, I would say that in general, right now, people are getting neither to commune with nature or with other people as much as they like. Of course, there are exceptions….
Erica — Not sure if you’ve been following the Car Free Mondays series here, but in case you’re new — I think you’d really enjoy reading what these women have to say about the reactions of car-dependent people :) Often, I think these fears of being mugged / assaulted are not all just fears, but go-to excuses for people who want reasons for why they don’t want to change their lifestyle.
Comment by Siel — August 25, 2009 @ 5:29 pm