Transportation and land-use preferences and residents’ neighborhood choices: the sufficiency of compact development in the Atlanta region

Abstract

This paper analyzes the transportation and land-use preference and actual neighborhood choices of a sample of 1,455 residents of metro Atlanta. We develop a stated-preference scale on which desires for neighborhood type are gauged, from preferences for low-density, auto-oriented environments to desires for compact, walkable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods. This scale is then related to desires for change in one’s own neighborhood characteristics after a hypothetical move. If all neighborhood preferences were equally likely to be satisfied, then neighborhood preferences would not be correlated with a desire for change. By contrast, in the current study, stronger preferences for a more walkable environment are associated with greater desire for change in one’s neighborhood characteristics. This suggests an undersupply of compact, walkable, and transit-friendly neighborhood types relative to current demand. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007Zoning, Land-use regulation, Stated preference, Residential choice, Smart growth, Compact development,

Densification without Growth Management? Evidence from Local Land Development and Housing Trends in Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

“…This large percentage alone may help a natural densification or infill in low-density urban areas to satisfy an increasing desire to reduce commutes. These national survey responses agree with the findings of Levine and Frank [8], and question the durability of Muth's [6] assumption that American consumers will select the longer commute.…”

“…Proponents of "sprawl" or suburbanization emphasize this consumer preference for low-density residential development, arguing that the resulting landscapes are a reflection of free market choices of Americans [7]. Others assert that the urban housing market is far from a freely operating system as zoning regulations and transportation and parking requirements all limit the availability of alternate, higher-density and mixed-use developments in certain markets [8]. Levine and Frank [8] further contend, based on a survey of Atlanta residents, that there is an unmet demand for smarter-growth developments, hypothesizing that if land-use regulations that encumber such developments were lifted, consumers would respond favorably.…”

Residents’ preferences for walkable neighbourhoods

“…Beginning with what is supported, a clear preference for walkable amenities located close to housing, alongside a strong dislike for high density development, is reported in many recent studies (Song and Knaap 2003;Morrow-Jones, Irwin, and Roe 2004;Levine and Frank 2007;Lewis and Baldassare 2010;Koster and Rouwendal 2012). Preferences for convenient access to public transport, better street connectivity (Song and Knaap 2003), space for walking and cycling (Levine and Frank 2007) and short commuting times (Morrow-Jones, Irwin, and Roe 2004) have been reported in a few studies whilst a couple report support for a whole sweep of walkable neighbourhood characteristics.…”

Understanding the Impacts of Human Mobility on Accessibility Using Massive Mobile Phone Tracking Data

“…This would increase individual time available for participating in discretionary activities at surrounding service facilities, enhancing their accessibility. This could also contribute to reduced travel demands in core urban areas (Timmermans, Arentze, and Joh 2002), as well as sustainable and compact development of the city (Levine and Frank 2007;van Wee and Handy 2016;Stevens 2017). For resource-poor regions, however, provision of adequate mobility would be an effective means to improve accessibility of disadvantage people.…”