This article investigates the impact of neighborhood walkability, measured by Street Smart Walk Score and sidewalk density, on property values by analyzing the 2010–2012 single-family home sale transactions in Austin, Texas. The Cliff-Ord spatial hedonic model (also known as the General Spatial Model, or SAC) is used to control for spatial autocorrelation effects. Results show that improving walkability through increased access to amenities in car-dependent neighborhoods does not appear to increase property values; adding sidewalks in these neighborhoods leads to a minimal increase in property values. Investments in neighborhood amenities and sidewalks will yield a greater home price increase in a walkable neighborhood than in a car-dependent neighborhood.
AndersonSoren T.WestSarah E.2006. Open space, residential property values, and spatial context. Regional Science and Urban Economics36 (6): 773–89.
2.
AnselinLuc. 1988. Spatial econometrics: Methods and models, studies in operational regional science. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
3.
ArmstrongRobert J.RodriguezDaniel A.2006. An evaluation of the accessibility benefits of commuter rail in eastern Massachusetts using spatial hedonic price functions. Transportation33 (1): 21–43.
4.
ArraizIraniDrukkerDavid M.KelejianHarry H.PruchaIngmar R.2010. A spatial cliff-ord-type model with heteroskedastic innovations: Small and large sample results. Journal of Regional Science50 (2): 592–614.
5.
BajariPatrickBenkardC. Lanier. 2005. Demand estimation with heterogeneous consumers and unobserved product characteristics: A hedonic approach. Journal of Political Economy113 (6): 1239–75.
6.
BartholomewKeithEwingReid. 2011. Hedonic price effects of pedestrian-and transit-oriented development. Journal of Planning Literature26 (1): 18–34.
7.
BerriganDavidPickleLinda W.DillJennifer. 2010. Associations between street connectivity and active transportation. International Journal of Health Geographics9 (1): 20.
8.
BoarnetMarlon G.JohKennethSiembabWalterFultonWilliamThi NguyenMai. 2011. Retrofitting the suburbs to increase walking: Evidence from a land-use-travel study. Urban Studies48 (1): 129–59.
9.
BowesDavid R.IhlanfeldtKeith R.2001. Identifying the impacts of rail transit stations on residential property values. Journal of Urban Economics50 (1): 1–25.
10.
BrasingtonDavid M.HiteDiane. 2005. Demand for environmental quality: A spatial hedonic analysis. Regional Science and Urban Economics35 (1): 57–82.
11.
BrownBarbara B.YamadaIkuhoSmithKen R.ZickCathleen D.Kowaleski-JonesLoriFanJessie X.2009. Mixed land use and walkability: Variations in land use measures and relationships with BMI, overweight, and obesity. Health & Place15 (4): 1130–41. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.06.008
12.
BrownsonRoss C.BakerElizabeth A.HousemannRobyn A.BrennanLaura K.BacakStephen J.2001. Environmental and policy determinants of physical activity in the United States. American Journal of Public Health91 (12): 1995–2003.
13.
CarrLucas J.DunsigerShira I.MarcusBess H.2010. Walk Score™ as a global estimate of neighborhood walkability. American Journal of Preventive Medicine39 (5): 460–63.
14.
CarrLucas J.DunsigerShira I.MarcusBess H.2011. Validation of Walk Score for estimating access to walkable amenities. British Journal of Sports Medicine45 (14): 1144–48.
15.
CaseAnne C.1991. Spatial patterns in household demand. Econometrica59 (4): 953–65.
16.
CerveroRobert. 2006. Effects of light and commuter rail transit on land prices: Experiences in San Diego County. Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center.
17.
CerveroRobertDuncanMichael. 2002. Transit’s value-added effects: Light and commuter rail services and commercial land values. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board1805 (1): 8–15.
18.
CerveroRobertKockelmanKara. 1997. Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment2 (3): 199–219.
CortrightJoe. 2009. Walking the walk: How walkability raises home values in U.S. cities. August. Cleveland, OH: CEOs for Cities.
21.
DillJennifer. 2003. Transit use and proximity to rail: Results from large employment sites in the San Francisco, California, Bay Area. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board1835 (1): 19–24.
22.
DingD.SallisJ. F.KerrJ.LeeS.RosenbergD. E.2011. Neighborhood environment and physical activity among youth: A review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine40 (4): 442–55.
23.
DrukkerDavid M.PengHuaPruchaIngmarRaciborskiRafal. 2011. SPPACK: Stata module for cross-section spatial-autoregressive models. Boston: Boston College Department of Economics.
24.
DuncanDustin T.AldstadtJaredWhalenJohnMellySteven J.2013. Validation of walk scores and transit scores for estimating neighborhood walkability and transit availability: A small-area analysis. GeoJournal78 (2): 407–16. doi:10.1007/s10708-011-9444-4
25.
DuncanDustin T.AldstadtJaredWhalenJohnMellySteven J.GortmakerSteven L.2011. Validation of Walk Score® for estimating neighborhood walkability: An analysis of four US metropolitan areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health8 (11): 4160–79.
26.
DuncanMichael. 2011. The impact of transit-oriented development on housing prices in San Diego, CA. Urban Studies48 (1): 101–27.
27.
EvansGary. 2003. The built environment and mental health. Journal of Urban Health80 (4): 536–55.
28.
EwingReidCerveroRobert. 2010. Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association76 (3): 265–94.
29.
FengJingGlassThomas A.CurrieroFrank C.StewartWalter F.SchwartzBrian S.2010. The built environment and obesity: A systematic review of the epidemiologic evidence. Health & Place16 (2): 175–90.
30.
FrankLawrence D.SallisJames F.ConwayTerry L.ChapmanJames E.SaelensBrian E.BachmanWilliam. 2006. Many pathways from land use to health: Associations between neighborhood walkability and active transportation, body mass index, and air quality. Journal of the American Planning Association72 (1): 75–87. doi:10.1080/01944360608976725
31.
FrankLawrenceSchmidThomasSallisJamesChapmanJamesSaelensBrian. 2005. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive Medicine28 (2): 117–25.
32.
Giles-CortiBillieDonovanRob J.2002. The relative influence of individual, social and physical environment determinants of physical activity. Social Science and Medicine54:1793–1812.
33.
Giles-CortiBillieDonovanRobert J.2003. Relative influences of individual, social environmental, and physical environmental correlates of walking. American Journal of Public Health93 (9): 1583–89.
34.
GolubAaronGuhathakurtaSubhrajitSollapuramBharath. 2012. Spatial and temporal capitalization effects of light rail in phoenix from conception, planning, and construction to operation. Journal of Planning Education and Research32 (4): 415–29.
35.
GuoJessica Y.GandavarapuSasanka. 2010. An economic evaluation of health-promotive built environment changes. Preventive Medicine50 (Suppl. 1): S44–S49.
36.
HamiltonStanley W.SchwannGregory M.1995. Do high voltage electric transmission lines affect property value?Land Economics71:436–44.
37.
HandyL. SusanBoarnetMarlon G.EwingReidKillingsworthRicahd. E.2003. How the built environment affects physical activity: Views from urban planning. American Journal of Preventive Medicine23 (2): 64–73.
38.
HandySusanCaoXinyuMokhtarianPatricia. 2005. Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment10 (6): 427–44.
39.
HandySusanCaoXinyuMokhtarianPatricia L. 2006. Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. Journal of the American Planning Association72 (1): 55–74.
40.
HandySusan LCliftonKelly J.2001. Local shopping as a strategy for reducing automobile travel. Transportation28 (4): 317–46.
41.
HandySusanSallisJames F.WeberDeanneMaibachEdHollanderMarla. 2008. Is support for traditionally designed communities growing? Evidence from two national surveys. Journal of the American Planning Association74 (2): 209–21.
42.
HoehnerChristine M.Brennan RamirezLaura K.ElliottMichael B.HandySusan L.BrownsonRoss C.2005. Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine28 (2, Suppl. 2): 105–16.
43.
HumpelNancyOwenNevilleLeslieEva. 2002. Environmental factors associated with adults’ participation in physical activity: A review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine22 (3): 188–99.
44.
JohKennethNguyenMai ThiBoarnetMarlon G.2012. Can built and social environmental factors encourage walking among individuals with negative walking attitudes?Journal of Planning Education and Research32 (2): 219–36.
45.
KennedyPeter. 2008. A guide to econometrics. 6th ed.Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
46.
KillingsworthRichard E.LammingJean. 2001. Development and public health: Could our development patterns be affecting our personal health?Urban Land, July: 12–17.
47.
KuminoffNicolai V.ParmeterChristopher F.PopeJaren C.2010. Which hedonic models can we trust to recover the marginal willingness to pay for environmental amenities?Journal of Environmental Economics and Management60 (3): 145–60. doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2010.06.001
LandisJohnGuhathakurtaSubhrajitZhangMing. 1994. Capitalization of transit investments into single-family home prices: A comparative analysis of five California rail transit systems. Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center.
50.
LeeChanamMoudonAnne Vernez. 2004. Physical activity and environment research in the health field: Implications for urban and transportation planning practice and research. Journal of Planning Literature19:147–81.
51.
LeeChanamMoudonAnne Vernez. 2006. The 3Ds+ R: Quantifying land use and urban form correlates of walking. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment11 (3): 204–15.
52.
LeinbergerChristopher B.2009. The option of urbanism: Investing in a new American dream. Washington, DC: Island Press.
53.
LeinbergerChristopherAlfonzoMariela. 2012. Walk this way: The economic promise of walkable places in metropolitan Washington, DC. Washington, DC: Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings.
MeeseR.WallaceN.1997. The construction of residential housing price indexes: A comparison of repeat sales, hedonic regression, and hybrid approaches. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics14:51–74.
63.
MoudonAnneLeeChanamCheadleAllen D.GarvinChezaJohnsonDonna B.SchmidThomas L.WeathersRobert D.2007. Attributes of environments supporting walking. American Journal of Health Promotion21 (5): 448–59. doi:10.4278/0890-1171-21.5.448
64.
MoudonAnne V.LeeChanamCheadleAllen D.GarvinChezaJohnsonDonnaSchmidThomas L.WeathersRobert D.LinLin. 2006. Operational definitions of walkable neighborhood: Theoretical and empirical insights. Journal of Physical Activity & Health3:S99.
65.
MyersDowellGearinElizabeth. 2001. Current preferences and future demand for denser residential environments. Housing Policy Debate12:633–59.
66.
PaceRobert K.LeSageJames P.2008. Biases of OLS and spatial lag models in the presence of an omitted variable and spatially dependent variables. Working paper. Available from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1133438.
67.
PivoGaryFisherJeffrey D.2011. The walkability premium in commercial real estate investments. Real Estate Economics39 (2): 185–219.
68.
RauterkusStephanie Y.MillerNorman G.2011. Residential land values and walkability. Journal of Sustainable Real Estate3 (1): 23–43.
69.
RedfearnChristian L.2008. How informative are average effects? Hedonic regression and amenity capitalization in complex urban housing markets. Regional Science and Urban Economics39(3). doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2008.11.001
70.
RenaldsArleneSmithTracey H.HalePatty J.2010. A systematic review of built environment and health. Family & Community Health33 (1): 68–78. doi:10.1097/FCH.0b013e3181c4e2e5
71.
RosenSherwin. 1974. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy82:34–55.
72.
SaelensBrian E.HandySusan L.2008. Built environment correlates of walking: A review. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise40 (7 Suppl.): S550.
73.
SaelensBrian E.SallisJames F.BlackJennifer B.ChenDiana. 2003. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. American Journal of Public Health93 (9): 1552–58.
74.
SallisJames F.SaelensBrian E.FrankLawrence D.ConwayTerry L.SlymenDonald J.CainKelli L.ChapmanJames E.KerrJacqueline. 2009. Neighborhood built environment and income: Examining multiple health outcomes. Social Science & Medicine68 (7): 1285–93.
75.
SaphoresJean-DanielLiWei. 2012. Estimating the value of urban green areas: A hedonic pricing analysis of the single family housing market in Los Angeles, CA. Landscape and Urban Planning104 (3–4): 373–87.
76.
SchwanenTimMokhtarianPatricia L.2005. What affects commute mode choice: Neighborhood physical structure or preferences toward neighborhoods?Journal of Transport Geography13 (1): 83–99.
77.
SohnDong WookMoudonAnne VernezLeeJeasun. 2012. The economic value of walkable neighborhoods. Urban Design International17 (2): 115–28.
78.
SongYanKnaapGerrit-Jan. 2003. New urbanism and housing values: A disaggregate assessment. Journal of Urban Economics54 (2): 218–38.
79.
SongYanKnaapGerrit-Jan. 2004. Measuring the effects of mixed land uses on housing values. Regional Science and Urban Economics34 (6): 663–80.
80.
TalGilHandySusan L.2012. Measuring nonmotorized accessibility and connectivity in a robust pedestrian network. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board2299 (1): 48–56.
