Current preferences and future demand for denser residential environments

Housing Policy Debate

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 633-659

  Myers, Dowell ^a   Gearin, Elizabeth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Demographics; Multifamily; Urban environment

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040748395     PISSN: 10511482     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2001.9521422     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Ahluwahlia, Gopal. 1999. Public Attitudes toward Growth. Housing Economics 37(5):7-12.
2. American LIVES, Inc. 1999. Community Preferences: What the Buyers Really Want in Design, Features, and Amenities - A Follow-up Study to the 1994 Shopper and Homeowner Study and the 1995 New Urbanism Study. Oakland, CA.
3. Danielsen, Karen A., Robert E. Lang, and William Fulton. 1999. Retracting Suburbia: Smart Growth and the Future of Housing. Housing Policy Debate 10(3):513-53.
4. Eppli, Mark J., and Charles Tu. 1999. Valuing the New Urbanism: The Impact of New Urbanism on Prices of Single Family Homes. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
5. Fader, Steven. 2000. Density by Design. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
6. Freeh, Louis B. 2000. Uniform Crime Report, January-June 2000 (released December 18). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
7. Galster, George, Royce Hanson, Michael R. Ratcliffe, Harold Wolman, Stephen Coleman, and Jason Freihage. 2001. Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and Measuring an Elusive Concept. Housing Policy Debate 12(4):681-718.
8. Goodman, Jack. 1999. The Changing Demography of Multifamily Rental Housing. Housing Policy Debate 10(1):31-57.
9. Hughes, James W., and Todd Zimmerman. 1993. The Dream Is Alive. American Demographics 15(8):32-38.
10. Kochera, Andrew. 1999. Characteristics of New Home Buyers. Housing Economics 37(6):5-10.
11. Malizia, Emil E., and Susan Exline. 2000. Consumer Preferences for Residential Development Alternatives. Working Paper 2000-02. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Center for Urban and Regional Studies.
12. Masnick, George S., and Zhu Xiao Di. 2000. Updating and Extending the Joint Center Household Projections Using New Census Bureau Population Projections. Working Paper N00-1. Joint Center for Housing Studies.
13. Myers, Dowell. 1999. Immigration and the American City. Housing Facts and Findings. Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation.
14. Myers, Dowell. 2000. Building the Future as a Process in Time. In Metropolitan Development Patterns: Annual Roundtable 2000, pp. 62-65. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute for Land Policy.
15. National Association of Home Builders. 1999. 1999 Smart Growth Survey. Unpublished questionnaire and detailed tabulations. Washington, DC.
16. Oldenburg, Ray. 1989. The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, Beauty Parlors, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts and How They Get You through the Day. New York: Paragon.
17. Richardson, Harry W., Peter Gordon, and M.-J. Jun. 1991. The Commuting Paradox: Evidence from the Top Twenty. Journal of the American Planning Association 57(4):416-20.
18. Texas Transportation Institute. 2001. Urban Mobility Study. World Wide Web page (accessed May 18).
19. Tu, Charles C., and Mark J. Eppli. 1999. Valuing New Urbanism: The Case of Kentlands. Real Estate Economics 27(3):453-73.
20. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1993. Public Use Microdata Samples: Technical Documentation. Washington, DC.
21. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2000. American Housing Survey for the United States. Current Housing Reports. H150/99. Washington, DC.
22. Volk, Laurie, and Todd Zimmerman. 2000. Confronting the Question of Market Demand for Urban Residential Development. Working paper. Fannie Mae Foundation.