|
|  |
| NEWS |
|
Pasadena Star News
January 17, 2003
Caltrans Houses in Limbo Shouldn't Just Sit Empty
By Margaret Middleton
Caltrans is finally attempting to rent 12 of the vacant properties it owns near Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena. These represent a few of the several hundred properties Caltrans owns along the path of the proposed 710 freeway. Many still remain vacant. As long as Caltrans won't sell them, these fine houses should be rented rather than sit idle attracting vandalism and vagrancy.
Unfortunately, Caltrans' policy of charging market rate rents, increased annually, mean these homes will not help stem the shortage of affordable housing in Pasadena. In a state that just passed a $2.1 billion bond to create and maintain affordable housing, a state agency should not be cashing in on rising property values. The City of Pasadena should lobby legislators to entrust these public assets to non-profit groups to be rented as affordable housing until they can be sold.
The 12 properties, all built between 1906 and 1930, are historic houses, duplexes and apartments including several grand bungalows. The properties range in rent from $1,100 per month for a 940-square-foot house built in 1924 to $5,000 per month for a stately seven-bedroom house built in 1911. High rents, steep yearly increases, and strict financial requirements for applicants will exclude middle and low-income families from renting these homes, contradicting the state of California's goal of creating affordable housing.
Caltrans guarantees that it can raise rents frequently by writing short-term leases in appreciating neighborhoods like South Western Pasadena. "The advantage" of short-
term leases is that rents can be adjusted yearly for "market changes," according to a Caltrans manual. As Caltrans' tenants can attest, if Caltrans can raise the rent, it will. Assemblywoman Carol Liu received so many complaints from Caltrans' tenants that she recently introduced legislation to freeze Caltrans' rents along the 710 corridor.
Not only does Caltrans aggressively raise rents, it holds its rental applicants to strict financial standards. Caltrans' manual says a qualified applicant should earn 4 times the rental rate per month. For example, Caltrans expects a tenant to earn at least $4,400 a month to rent a $1,100 per month house on Glenarm St., the least expensive of the twelve offered. Because of high property values, many working families in Pasadena may earn only 2 or 3 times their monthly rent. Using the federal government's more generous definition of affordability, a tenant earning $3,300 a month would qualify to rent the same house on Glenarm. Under Caltrans' policy a prospective tenant earning the median household income in Pasadena of $46,012 need not apply.
In addition to proposing freezing Caltrans rents, Carol Liu could introduce another bill directing the way Caltrans' rental properties are managed. This would not be the first time California lawmakers have stepped in to prescribe how Caltrans handles property. California passed a bill in 1979 dictating that Caltrans sell properties it no longer needs back to their original owners for fair market value or to current low-income tenants at affordable prices. This law acknowledged that "highway and other state activities" contributed to the "serious shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing which persons and families of low or moderate income can afford".
The City of Pasadena should promote a similar law requiring Caltrans properties to be rented at affordable rates. The law could require Caltrans to turn the management of these houses over to the City of Pasadena. The City in turn could contract with non-profit groups to manage the properties as affordable rental housing until either the freeway is built or the houses can be sold. New management could also ensure that historic homes receive proper maintenance.
Caltrans is attempting to rent 12 units but many more sit vacant. Rather than letting these houses rot, or making them public housing for the wealthy, lets use our public resources to address a public problem. The City of Pasadena should insist on local management of these lovely homes.
From the Pasadena Star News January 17, 2003
Follow-up Article in the Pasadena Star News: Tunnel Plan for 710 Gets Cool Reception By Mary Schubert
|
|
