The Width and Value of Residential Streets

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings The width of street rights-of-way is normally determined by traffic engineering and urban design conventions, without considering the immense value of the underlying land. In this article, I develop an economic framework that can inform decisions on street width, and I use tax parcel data to quantify the widths, land areas, and land value of streets in 20 of the largest counties in the United States. Residential street rights-of-way in the urbanized portion of these counties average 55 ft wide, far greater than the functional minimum of 16 ft required for access. The land value of residential streets totals $959 billion in the urbanized portion of the 20-county sample. In most counties, subdivision regulations are binding. That is, few developers choose to build streets that are wider than code requirements, implying that softening requirements would mean more land devoted to housing and less to streets. Although I highlight the potential for narrower street rights-of-way, I did not consider detailed design issues. Nor did I analyze how any windfall from reduced land requirements would be divided among landowners, developers, and house purchasers. Takeaway for practice Particularly in places with high land values and housing costs, reallocating street rights-of-way to housing would increase economic efficiency. In the most expensive county in the data set—Santa Clara (CA)—narrowing the right-of-way to 16 ft would save more than $100,000 per housing unit through reduced land consumption. Where streets have little or no function for through traffic, the costs and benefits accrue almost exclusively to neighborhood residents. Thus, planners could reduce or even eliminate street width requirements in subdivision ordinances, leaving developers to make the trade-off between land for streets and land for housing.