By taking advantage of two recent data sets with exceptional spatial detail, this research is a comprehensive and spatially disaggregate study of the relationship between the built environment and residential property values in the Boston, Massachusetts, metropolitan area. The study computes 27 built environment variables at a 250 m × 250 m grid cell level, uses factor analysis to extract five built environment factors to mitigate multicollinearity, and integrates built environment factors into hedonic price models. Spatial regression techniques are applied to correct spatial autocorrelation. Residential property values are found to be positively associated with accessibility to transit and jobs, connectivity, and walkability and negatively related to auto dominance. Built environment effects depend on neighborhood characteristics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
TuC., and EppliM.Valuing New Urbanism: The Case of the Kentlands.Real Estate Economics, 27, 1999, pp. 425–451.
2.
CaoT., and CoryD.Mixed Land Uses, Land Use Externalities, and Residential Property Values: A Reevaluation.Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 16, 1981, pp. 1–24.
3.
SongY., and KnaapG.-J.Measuring the Effects of Mixed Land Uses on Housing Values.Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 34, 2004, pp. 663–680.
4.
BowesD., and IhlanfeldtK.Identifying the Impacts of Rail Transit Stations on Residential Property Values.Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 50, No. 1, 2001, pp. 1–25.
5.
MatthewsJ., and TurnbullG.Neighborhood Street Layout and Property Value: The Interaction of Accessibility and Land Use Mix.Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Vol. 35, 2007, pp. 111–141.
6.
CaseB., ClappJ., DubinR., and RodriguezM.Modeling Spatial and Temporal House Price Patterns: A Comparison of Four Models.Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Vol. 29, 2004, pp. 167–191.
7.
von ThünenJ. H.Isolated State: An English Edition of Der isolierte Staat (C. M. Wartenberg, trans.), Oxford, New York, Pergamon Press, 1966.
8.
AlonsoW.Location and Land Use: Toward a General Theory of Land Rent.Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1964.
9.
MuthR.Cities and Housing: The Spatial Pattern of Urban Residential Land Use.University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., 1969.
10.
MillsE.Studies in the Structure of the Urban Economy.Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Md., 1972.
11.
HandyS., BoarnetM.. How the Built Environment Affects Physical Activity: Views from Urban Planning.American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 23, 2002, pp. 64–73.
12.
CraneR.On Form Versus Function: Will the New Urbanism Reduce Traffic, or Increase It?Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 15, 1996, pp. 117–126.
13.
BoarnetM., and CraneR.The Influence of Land Use on Travel Behavior: Specification and Estimation Strategies.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 35, 2001, pp. 823–845.
14.
FanY., and KhattakA.Impact of the Built Environment on Travel Distance and Time Costs: Trip-Level Analysis. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
15.
CaoX., MokhtarianP., and HandyS.The Relationship Between the Built Environment and Nonwork Travel: A Case Study of Northern California.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 43, 2009, pp. 548–559.
16.
RosenS.Hedonic Price and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition.Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 82, 1974, pp. 34–45.
17.
EdelM., and SclarE.Taxes, Spending, and Property Values: Supply Adjustment in a Tiebout–Oates Model.Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 82, 1974, pp. 941–954.
18.
KingA.Estimating Property Tax Capitalization: A Critical Comment.Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 85, No. 2, 1977, pp. 425–431.
19.
DownesT., and ZabelJ.The Impact of School Characteristics on House Prices: Chicago 1987–1991.Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 52, 2002, pp. 1–25.
20.
RodriguezD., and MojicaC.Capitalization of BRT Network Expansions Effects into Prices of Non-Expansion Areas.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 43, No. 5, 2009, pp. 560–571.
21.
SongY., and KnaapG.-J.New Urbanism and Housing Values: A Disaggregate Assessment.Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 54, 2003, pp. 218–238.
22.
CerveroR., and KockelmanK.Travel Demand and the 3Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design.Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1997, pp. 199–219.
23.
AnselinL.Discrete Space Autoregressive Models. In Environmental Modeling with GIS (GoodchildM., ParksB., and SteyaertL., eds.), Oxford University Press, New York,1993, pp. 454–469.
24.
ZhangM., and KukadiaN.Metrics of Urban Form and the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1902, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 71–79.
25.
RobsenB. T.Urban Analysis: A Study of City Structure with Special Reference to Sunderland.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1969.
26.
UntermannR.Accommodating the Pedestrian: Adapting Towns and Neighborhoods for Walking and Bicycling.Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1984.
27.
MalpezziS.Hedonic Pricing Models: A Selective and Applied Review.2002.
28.
HansenW.How Accessibility Shapes Land Use.Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1959, pp. 73–76.
29.
ZhangM.Exploring the Relationship Between Urban Form and Nonwork Travel Through Time Use Analysis.Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 73, No. 2-3, 2005, pp. 244–261.
30.
TurnerM., GardnerR., and O'NeillR.Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice: Pattern and Process.Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001.
31.
NelsonJ.Highway Noise and Property Values: A Survey of Recent Evidence.Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 16, No. 22, 1982, pp. 117–138.
32.
AnselinL., and GetisA.Spatial Statistical Analysis and Geographic Information Systems.Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1992, pp. 19–33.
