An Empirical Examination of Traditional Neighborhood Development

Abstract

This study analyzes the impact of the new urbanism on single‐family home prices. Specifically, we explore the price differential that homebuyers pay for houses in new urbanist developments relative to houses in conventional suburban developments. Using data on over 5,000 single‐family home sales from 1994 to 1997 in three different neighborhoods, hedonic regression results reveal that consumers pay more for homes in new urbanist communities than those in conventional suburban developments. Further analyses indicate that the price premium is not attributable to differences in improvement age and other housing characteristics.

Is there diversity in the New Urbanism? Analyzing the demographic characteristics of New Urbanist neighborhoods in the United States

“…These differences were also evident for particular types of NU neighborhoods as well. These patterns make sense in light of studies that show, on the one hand, about half of NU projects host affordable housing units (Johnson & Talen, 2008), and on the other, many NU developments host housing for higher income groups (Tu & Eppli, 2001). Johnson and Talen (2008) further find that much of the housing accessible to extremely lowincome households is concentrated in HUD-supported developments, such as HOPE VI and Home Ownership Zones (HOZ).…”

“…Arguments about the exclusivity of NU neighborhoods have rested primarily on a number of studies that show NU neighborhoods are inaccessible to low-income households. Several studies have shown that buying a house in NU neighborhoods is much pricier than buying in a conventional subdivision (Eppli & Tu, 1999;Song & Knapp, 2003, 2004Tu & Eppli, 2001). Similarly, NU projects can prove significantly more costly to develop on account of the greater amount of infrastructure and amenities sited therein (Grant, 2003).…”

Affordable housing in New Urbanist Communities: A survey of developers

“…First, as noted earlier, there is a substantial need for housing in this price range across the country (Joint Center for Housing Studies 2007). Second, because most New Urbanist projects are priced at above-market rates (Tu and Eppli 2001), even the inclusion of moderateincome affordable units often represents a conscious effort on the part of the developer to increase diversity and inclusiveness. The methods these developers used are worth noting and possibly replicating.…”

“…Despite the unequivocal goal of income diversity as expressed in the Charter for the New Urbanism, Principle XIII (CNU 2000), New Urbanist development as currently practiced is not typically affordable for households at the lower end of the income spectrum (CNU 2007). While existing surveys of affordability in New Urbanist developments are still preliminary, numerous anecdotal accounts (e.g., Kelly 2006), together with solid empirical evidence that these developments can command higher prices than traditional suburban developments in comparable locations (Leinberger 2008;Tu and Eppli 2001), indicate that the movement is mostly building for upper-middle-class residents.…”

Is subsidized housing in sustainable neighborhoods? Evidence from Chicago

“…One study of housing prices in New Urbanist development -a development form meant to be sustainable -found that most projects were priced at above-market rates (Eppli and Tu 1999). Subsequent research supported the view that New Urbanist developers have been able to command a higher price in the market place (Tu and Eppli 2001). Song and Knaap's 2003 study of New Urbanist housing values found that a net 18 percent premium was paid for design amenities like pedestrian quality and walkable access, while another recent study funded by the US Department of Transportation found that many New Urbanist developments -those located near transit stops -are becoming increasingly unaffordable (USDOT 2008).…”