Abstract
Empirical evidence concerning the impact of neighborhood land-use externalities on residential property value is mixed. That is, no concensus has emerged in the literature as to whether locating non-residential land-use activities in residential neighborhoods can be expected to increase, decrease or leave unaltered surrounding property values. The purpose of this research was two-fold: 1) to construct a theoretical model of consumer behavior in which both the positive and negative effects of neighborhood land-use externalities are taken into account, and 2) to test this generalized model empirically, using hedonic pricing equations. The principal implication of the theoretical model is that the effect of non-residential activity on residential property values isa priori indeterminate, the outcome depending on the relative strength of the associated positive and negative external effects generated. The empirical test of the model was conducted for the city of Tucson, Arizona, where it is shown that over low ranges, increasing the amount of industrial, commercial, multifamily and public land-use activity in a neighborhood tended to increase surrounding residential property values. It is concluded that in locating future economic activity an optimal mix of landuse activities should be sought, not the regional separation of activities.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alonso, William.Location and Land Use. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964.
City of Tucson, Arizona, Planning Division.Zoning Ordinance, No. 3038, adopted Sept. 11, 1967.
City of Tucson, Arizona, Department of Community Development.Land Use, Zoning and Census Data by Census Tract Number, 1973.
Crecine, John P., Otto A. Davis, and John D. Jackson, “Urban Property Markets: Some Empirical Results and Their Implications for Municipal Zoning,”Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 10, October 1967, pp. 79–99.
Griliches, Zvi. “Hedonic Price Indexes for Automobile: An Econometric Analysis of Quality Changes,”The Price Statistics of the Federal Government, Princeton, New Jersey: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1961.
Griliches, Zvi. “Hedonic Price Indexes Revisited,” in Griliches, Zvi (ed.),Price Indexes and Quality Change, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Hartshorn, T. A.Interpreting the City, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1980.
King, A. Thomas.Property Taxes, Amenities, and Residential Land Values. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1973.
Kish, L. and Lansing, J. “Response Errors in Estimating the Value of Homes,”Am. Stat. Assoc. Journal, September, 1954.
Lancaster, K. J. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory,”Journal of Political Economy, April 1966, pp. 132–157.
Li, M. M., and Brown, H. J. “Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Housing Prices,”Land Economics, May 1980, pp. 125–141.
Procos, D.,Mixed Land Use: From Revival to Innovation. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, Dowden, Hutchison and Ross, 1976.
Rueter, Frederick H. “Externalities in Urban Property Markets: An Empirical Test of the Zoning Ordinance of Pittsburgh,”Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 16, October 1973, pp. 313–349.
Stull, William J. “Community Environment, Zoning, and the Market Value of Single-Family Homes,”Journal of Law and Economics, October 1975, pp. 535–557.
Tiebout, Charles. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures,”Journal of Political Economy, October 1956, pp. 416–424.
U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.United States 1970 Census of Population and Housing Census Tracts, Tucson, Arizona. SMSA, No. PHC (1)-218, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January 1972.
Urban Institute. “Mixed Use Developments: New Ways of Land Use,”Technical Bulletin No. 71, 1976.
Weaver, C. L. and Babcock, R. F.City Zoning: The Once and Future Frontier. Chicago, American Planning Association, 1979.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Cao, T., Cory, D.C. Mixed land uses, land-use externalities, and residential property values: A reevaluation. Ann Reg Sci 16, 1–24 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287403
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287403