We study the short-run effects of a large-scale upzoning on house prices and redevelopment premiums in Auckland, New Zealand. Upzoning significantly increases the redevelopment premium but the overall effect on house prices depends on the economic potential for site redevelopment, with underdeveloped properties appreciating relative to intensively developed properties. Notably, intensively developed properties decrease in value relative to similar dwellings that were not upzoned, showing that the large-scale upzoning had an immediate depreciative effect on pre-existing intensive housing. Our results show that the economic potential for site redevelopment is fundamental to understanding the impact of changes in land use regulations on property values.
AnackerKB (2019) Introduction: Housing affordability and affordable housing. International Journal of Housing Policy19(1): 1–16.
2.
Atkinson-PalomboC (2010) Comparing the capitalisation benefits of light-rail transit and overlay zoning for single-family houses and condos by neighborhood type in Metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona. Urban Studies47(11): 2409–2426.
ChakrabortyAKnaapG-JNguyenD, et al. (2010) The effects of high-density zoning on multifamily housing construction in the suburbs of six US Metropolitan areas. Urban Studies47(2): 437–451.
7.
ChettyRLooneyAKroftK (2009) Salience and taxation: Theory and evidence. American Economic Review99(4): 1145–1177.
8.
ClappJMSalaveiK (2010) Hedonic pricing with redevelopment options: A new approach to estimating depreciation effects. Journal of Urban Economics67(3): 362–377.
9.
ClappJMJouJ-BLeeT (2012a) Hedonic models with redevelopment options under uncertainty. Real Estate Economics40(2): 197–216.
10.
ClappJMSalavei BardosKWongSK (2012b) Empirical estimation of the option premium for residential redevelopment. Regional Science and Urban Economics42(1): 240–256.
11.
ClarkeD (2017) Estimating difference-in-differences in the presence of spillovers. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MRPA) Working Paper 81604. Available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/81604/
12.
ConleyTG (1999) GMM estimation with cross sectional dependence. Journal of Econometrics92(1): 1–45.
13.
DaltonMZabelJ (2011) The impact of minimum lot size regulations on house prices in Eastern Massachusetts. Regional Science and Urban Economics41(6): 571–583.
DiNardoJ (2008) Natural experiments and quasi-natural experiments. In: MacmillanPalgrave (ed.) The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
16.
FavilukisJMabillePVan NieuwerburghS (2019) Affordable housing and city welfare. NBER Working Paper 25906. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
FreemanLSchuetzJ (2017) Producing affordable housing in rising markets: What works?Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research19(1): 217–236.
19.
FreemarkY (2019a) Upzoning Chicago: Impacts of a zoning reform on property values and housing construction. Urban Affairs Review56(3): 758–789.
20.
FreemarkY (2019b) Doubling housing production in the Paris region: A multi-policy, multi-jurisdictional response. International Journal of Housing Policy. Epub ahead of print 19December2019. DOI: 10.1080/19491247.2019.1682233
21.
GabbeCJ (2018) Why are regulations changed? A parcel analysis of upzoning in Los Angeles. Journal of Planning Education and Research38(3): 289–300.
22.
GlaeserELGyourkoJ (2003) The impact of building restrictions on housing affordability. Economic Policy Review9(2): 21–39.
23.
GlaeserELWardB (2009) The causes and consequences of land use regulation: Evidence from Greater Boston. Journal of Urban Economics65(3): 265–278.
24.
GyourkoJMolloyR (2015) Regulation and housing supply. In: DurantonGHendersonJVStrangeWC (eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Vol. 5 of Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 1289–1337.
25.
HilberCAVermeulenW (2016) The impact of supply constraints on house prices in England. The Economic Journal126(591): 358–405.
26.
IhlanfeldtK (2007) The effect of land use regulation on housing and land prices. Journal of Urban Economics61: 420–435.
27.
JacksonK (2016) Do land use regulations stifle residential development? Evidence from California cities. Journal of Urban Economics91: 45–56.
28.
ManvilleMMonkkonenPLensM (2020) It’s time to end single-family zoning. Journal of the American Planning Association86(1): 106–112.
O’FlahertyB (1994) Land assembly and urban renewal. Regional Science and Urban Economics24(3): 287–300.
31.
PogodzinskiJMSassTR (1991) Measuring the effects of municipal zoning regulations: A survey. Urban Studies28(4): 597–621.
32.
QuigleyJMRaphaelS (2005) Regulation and the high cost of housing in California. American Economic Review95(2): 323–329.
33.
Rodriguez-PoseAStorperM (2020) Housing, urban growth and inequalities: The limits to deregulation and upzoning in reducing economic and spatial inequality. Urban Studies57(2): 223–248.
34.
SchillMH (2005) Regulations and housing development: What we know. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research8(1): 5–20.
35.
WetzsteinS (2019) Assessing post-GFC housing affordability interventions: A qualitative exploration across five international cities. International Journal of Housing Policy. Epub ahead of print 30October2019. DOI: 10.1080/19491247.2019.1662639
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
