I think his point is that it is terrific for those rich enough to live near an LRT station and results in big appreciation of real estate (poor people disproportionately rent can own so property value increases benefit the rich but not the poor). Buses do very little for property values but help everyone's commute.

I'm not a huge fan of his arguments but I'd say he's saying more of the opposite, ie. "Light rail only advantages rich homeowners"

"Light rail advantages the owners of nearby land, driving out the low-income tenants, and doesn't serve as many people as a similar-cost bus system"