Mixed-Use, Mixed Impact: Re-Examining the Relationship Between Non-Residential Land Uses & Residential Property Values

Mixed-Use, Mixed Impact: Re-Examining the Relationship between Non-Residential Land Uses & Residential Property Values Steven Loehr Advisor: Elliott Sclar Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master of Science in Urban Planning Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation Columbia University May 2013 Abstract Recent trends in planning, public policy, and real estate development have favored dense mixed- use development clusters in suburban communities. This thesis examines the relationship between such activity zones and adjacent residential property values. Regression analyses were used to determine the significance and direction of this relationship in seven study districts in Miami-Dade County, Florida, with the results analyzed in accordance with each district’s unique physical and contextual features. Although proximity to mixed-use districts was found to be relatively insignificant when compared with other property-oriented variables, its impact on property values was often sizeable, generally positive, and varied substantially in strength depending upon scale and location. This indicates that mixed-use districts are associated with net benefits for adjacent residential properties, and also highlights the importance of design and local context in planning for these developments. In addition, proximity to mixed-use districts was found to have a consistently stronger impact on multi-family residential property values than on those of single-family residential properties. Loehr I 3 Contents Abstract 3 I. Background + Introduction 7 Context 7 Rationale 7 Hypothesis 9 II. Literature Review 9 III. Data & Methodology 12 Case Study: Miami-Dade County 12 Data 12 Theoretical Framework 13 IV. Study Areas: 14 V. Results & Analysis 22 Explanatory Power of Proximity + Other Variables 22 Spatial Differences in Influence 23 Differences in Influence between Residential Property Types 26 Differences in Influence According to District Characteristics 27 VI. Conclusion 28 Limitations + Suggestions for Further Research 28 Implications 29 Bibliography 30 Appendix A: Detailed Regression Results 33 Appendix B: Supplementary Regression Results 40 Loehr I 5 I. Background + Introduction developments, but also by evidence that demand for multi-family housing already Context exceeds supply in many suburban areas (Nelson, 2007). In response to Americans’ growing displeasure with suburban sprawl and typical Proponents of mixed-use suburban town commercial strip development, mixed-use centers claim that these districts have the suburban centers have grown in number and potential to reduce vehicular travel and popularity over the past decade across much associated emissions, promote diversity of the nation. Arising largely in conjunction among housing types, businesses, and with the New Urbanism and Smart Growth residents, and boost civic identity and movements, these developments have community pride. Additionally, a desire to emerged both in newly developed planned attract and retain young professionals and communities and in older suburbs with weak members of the “creative class” has also or non-existent downtown cores. One 2007 contributed to interest in cultivating “urban” survey of the 130 largest metropolitan areas lifestyle patterns in the suburbs. in the United States found that there are now an equal number of “walkable urban places” In practice, however, development of this in America’s suburbs as in its center cities sort has been met with controversy in many (Leinberger, 2007). suburban communities. Residents are often hostile to the idea of increased density, Amidst persistent concerns over climate building heights, pedestrian activity, and change, fossil fuel dependency, and the vehicular congestion, in addition to the depletion of developable land in many diverse populations that are often attracted metropolitan areas, the emergence of by dense, mixed-use development. Moreover, this trend has come at a key time in the the implementation of this typology is trajectory of the American suburb. Suburban contingent upon the support and cooperation demographics have shifted in recent years, of various levels of government, private with many predominantly white, upper- sector investment, and citizen receptiveness, middle class areas becoming more ethnically all of which are mutually dependent on one and economically diverse, while remaining another. sites of large youth and senior populations. Because lower-income, non-white, and Rationale young and old populations have traditionally been more receptive to density, alternative In order to help evaluate the viability of travel modes, and mixed land uses, many mixed-use suburban town centers, this thesis have speculated that the demand for dense will examine whether the existence of these “urban” clusters has increased in suburban districts provides a boost to surrounding communities. This notion is supported property values. The results will help to not only by the proliferation of these determine whether residents are receptive Loehr I 7 to this development typology, and what Because the majority of existing research physical and contextual factors may influence on property value impacts of adjacent land this receptiveness. uses considers all non-residential areas to be one in the same, particular attention will This analysis will also provide a timely be paid to the quality and style of the built evaluation of the effectiveness of planning environment. The assumption examined initiatives within the context of the here is that differences in context and design residential property market. As planners and – from streetscaping and architectural quality, policymakers continue to push for increased to programming and historic character, to density, concentrated development, multi- the degree of land use homogeneity and family housing, alternative transportation access to transit – will make a difference in use, and a well-planned mix of uses, it is the attractiveness and desirability of a town useful to measure whether these measures center. are widely supported by the general public. The intent of this analysis is to provide an Survey and interview analyses are often not assessment of the effectiveness of planning reflective of actual behaviors and preferences, ideals which date back to Jane Jacobs and particularly when it comes to cultural have been enjoying a resurgence amidst constructs, such as neighborhood identity, twenty-first century smart growth strategies: and a phenomenon as path dependent as density, walkability, 24/7 activity, and most one’s place of residence. Moreover, small- notably, mixed-uses. Should insignificant scale preference studies tend to suffer from relationships be found between proximity to issues of self-selection, where residents mixed-use downtown districts and residential supporting certain development typologies property values, this would suggest that flock to their areas of preference, making it consumers have yet to fully support this new challenging to assess their attractiveness and development paradigm. However, if the viability to the entire populace. relationship between these two factors is found to be substantial, one could conclude To counter these issues, property values are that there is some degree of market support often used to provide a more quantitative for these patterns of development. and data-driven method of analyzing the receptiveness of consumers to certain Furthermore, the comparative performance features, as these values are theoretically of purpose-built mixed-use complexes, reflections of market demand. Although organically-developed downtowns, and assessed values do not fully reflect human relatively ‘unplanned’ strip corridors will valuation, they provide a strong proxy for enable evaluation of the effectiveness of the demand for a property, given a collection planners and urban designers’ efforts to craft of various desirable and undesirable these spaces in response to human needs, characteristics. preferences, and ideals. 8 I Mixed-Use, Mixed-Impact Finally, it should be briefly noted that, in typology. Finally, proximity to automobile- the context of this study, the term “mixed- oriented arterial strips is expected to have use” does not necessarily require the co- a negative impact on directly adjacent existence of residential and commercial use property values, due to unsightliness, noise, groups. Geared instead around the presence congestion, and other negative externalities, of different activity generators, this analysis outweighing the convenience of nearby uses a more expansive definition, where commercial uses. the integration of residential, retail, office, industrial, or civic uses in any combination II. Literature Review may constitute a “mixed-use” environment. Existing literature dealing with suburban Hypothesis downtowns is plentiful and extensive, and includes strands related to smart growth, Based on the classical notion that unplanned transit-oriented development, consumer mixed-use development results in negative preferences for various housing typologies, externalities, it is expected that carefully downtown revitalization strategies, and designed centers will provide the greatest environmental impacts of sprawl, among boost to adjacent property values. Of these, various other topics. Also falling under this town centers set amidst master-planned umbrella is a relatively large body of research communities are anticipated to have the focusing specifically on the

Load more