Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Pay less than market value when condemning land for rail right-of-way?
The Colorado legislature is considering a bill that would allow Denver's transit district to pay as little as half the market value of land it needs to condemn for rights of way for new rail transit lines. The theory is that the transit lines will increase the value of the property owner's remaining land, so paying less than full market value allows the taxpayers to enjoy some of this so-called "windfall profit."
In the transit agency's defense, the state transportation department already has this power when condemning land for highways. But rail skeptics are suspicious that RTD, which both lied and cheated to convince voters to support new rail transit lines, will not use its power honestly or wisely. (It lied when it told voters, in a $400,000 "educational" pamphlet, that rail transit would reduce congestion and pollution when its own studies showed that it would not. It cheated when it incorporated statements from pro-rail groups in an opposition statement that went to all voters in what was supposed to be a fair-and-balanced pro-and-con voters' guide.)
From experience in other cities, rail transit doesn't have much influence on property values. An analysis of BART found that development was more intensive the further away you got from the rail stations. Portland found it could not inspire developers to build along its rail lines without hundreds of millions of dollars of additional subsidies. But landowners won't find out that rail transit hasn't increased the value of their land until years after the rights of way are condemned.
The always pro-rail Denver Post supports this bill, but one of the paper's columnists, David Harsanyi, writes in opposition.
In the transit agency's defense, the state transportation department already has this power when condemning land for highways. But rail skeptics are suspicious that RTD, which both lied and cheated to convince voters to support new rail transit lines, will not use its power honestly or wisely. (It lied when it told voters, in a $400,000 "educational" pamphlet, that rail transit would reduce congestion and pollution when its own studies showed that it would not. It cheated when it incorporated statements from pro-rail groups in an opposition statement that went to all voters in what was supposed to be a fair-and-balanced pro-and-con voters' guide.)
From experience in other cities, rail transit doesn't have much influence on property values. An analysis of BART found that development was more intensive the further away you got from the rail stations. Portland found it could not inspire developers to build along its rail lines without hundreds of millions of dollars of additional subsidies. But landowners won't find out that rail transit hasn't increased the value of their land until years after the rights of way are condemned.
The always pro-rail Denver Post supports this bill, but one of the paper's columnists, David Harsanyi, writes in opposition.
Comments:
Post a Comment
