Abstract
Recently, the improvement of job accessibility and the encouragement of mixed land use have been gaining popularity in the planning field. However, little is known about whether these two factors are able to meet housing consumers’ needs. This study aims to analyze how job accessibility and mixed land use satisfy housing consumers’ needs. Particularly, this study investigates housing consumers’ willingness to pay for these two features by using housing prices and rents in the Chicago metropolitan area. In order to deal with endogeneity between land use and housing prices and spatial autocorrelation between housing prices, spatial econometric models are used with instrumental variables. Interestingly, our findings show that an increase in job accessibility leads to an increase in housing prices, whereas it is not related to rents. We also found that mixed land use decreases housing prices, but increases rents.
Highlights
Today’s land use planning and policies are intended to preserve values of cultural resources and enhance sustainable communities and neighborhoods
An increase in job accessibility causes an increase in housing price, whereas an increase in mixed land use causes a decrease in housing price
The results suggest that housing consumers are likely to pay more for the neighborhood with higher job accessibility, but they are not willing to pay for the neighborhood with higher mixed land use
Summary
Today’s land use planning and policies are intended to preserve values of cultural resources and enhance sustainable communities and neighborhoods. Among various specific components to achieve these goals in planning practice, the improvement of job accessibility and the encouragement of mixed land use have gaining popularity in the planning field This is because successfully designing and utilizing these two features through land use and transportation planning can reduce individual vehicle mile travel (VMT) and urban traffic congestion [1] but can provide lively urban environments [2]. Living closer to jobs and locating closer to workers would have great benefits for workers as well as employers by reducing commuting costs and making employers easier to find These two elements improve the balance of jobs and housing, they are different in other ways. Few studies have examined the differences between these two concepts in housing markets
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
