Walkability and the benefits of place-based housing: an examination of Louisville’s HOPE VI neighborhoods

References

• Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical methods for the social sciences (4th ed., pp. 519–544). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Ambrosius, J. D., Gilderbloom, J. I., & Hanka, M. J. (2010). Back to black… and green? Location and policy interventions in contemporary neighborhood housing markets. Housing Policy Debate, 20(3), 457–484. doi:10.1080/10511482.2010.487655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appelbaum, R. P. (1976). The effects of urban growth: A population impact analysis. New York, NY: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Bair, E., & Fitzgerald, J. M. (2005). Hedonic estimation and policy significance of the impact of HOPE VI on neighborhood property values. Review of Policy Research, 22(6), 771–786. doi:10.1111/ropr.2005.22.issue-6
   Google Scholar
• Bajari, P., & Kahn, M. E. (2005). Estimating housing demand with an application to explaining racial segregation in cities. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 23(1), 20–33. doi:10.1198/073500104000000334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blum, U. (1997). Benefits and externel benefits of transport: A spatial view. In D. L. Greene, D. Jones, & M. A. Delucchi (Eds.), The full costs and benefits of transportation (pp. 219–244). Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Blumenberg, E., & Pierce, G. (2014). A driving factor in mobility? Transportation’s role in connecting subsidized housing and employment outcomes in the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program. Journal of the American Planning Association, 80(1), 52–66. doi:10.1080/01944363.2014.935267
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenberg, E., Pierce, G., & Smart, M. (2015). Transportation access, residential location, and economic opportunity: Evidence from two housing voucher experiments. Cityscape, 17(2), 89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, J. P. (2002). Two cheers for gentrification. Howard Law Journal, 46, 405.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, L. J., Dunsiger, S. I., & Marcus, B. H. (2010). Walk score™ as a global estimate of neighborhood walkability. American Journal Of Preventive Medicine, 39(5), 460–463. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2010.07.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherian, M. (2014). Race in the mortgage market: An Empirical Investigation Using HMDA Data. Race, Gender & Class, 21(1/2), 48.
   Google Scholar
• Cisneros, H. G., & Engdahl, L. (2009). From despair to hope: Hope VI and the new promise of public housing in America’s cities. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clifton, K., Currans, K. M., Muhs, C. D., Ritter, C., Morrissey, S., & Roughton, C. (2012). Consumer behavior and travel choices: A focus on cyclists and pedestrians. In 92nd annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board (Vol. 14). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Cortright, J. (2009). Walking the walk: How walkability raises home values in U.S. cities. CEOs for Cities. Retrieved from http://www.ceosforcities.org/pagefiles/WalkingTheWalk_CEOsforCities.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cytron, N. (2010). Improving the outcomes of place-based initiatives. Community Investments, 22(1), 2–7.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, N. M. (2009). Reconciling people and place in housing and community development policy. Georgetown Journal On Poverty Law & Policy, XVI(1), 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• DeLuca, S. (2012). What is the role of housing policy? Considering choice and social science evidence. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(1), 21–28. doi:10.1111/juaf.2012.34.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diao, M., & Ferreira, J. J. (2010). Residential property values and the built environment: Empirical study in the Boston, Massachusetts, metropolitan area. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2174, 138–147. doi:10.3141/2174-18
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorsey, B., & Mulder, A. (2013). Planning, place-making and building consensus for transit-oriented development: Ogden, Utah case study. Journal of Transport Geography, 32, 65–76. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.08.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowling, R. G., Reinke, D. B., Flannery, A., Ryus, P., Vandehey, M., Petritsch, T. A., ... Bonneson, J. A. (2008). NCHRP report 616: Multimodal level of service analysis for urban streets. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Dreier, P., Mollenkopf, J. H., & Swanstrom, T. (2004). Place matters: Metropolitics for the twenty-first century. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., & Speck, J. (2001). Suburban nation: The rise of sprawl and the decline of the American dream. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ellen, I. G. (2008). Continuing isolation: Segregation in America today. In J. H. Carr & N. K. Kutty (Eds.), Segregation: The rising costs for America (Vol. 1, pp. 261–277). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ewing, R, & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265-294. doi:10.1080/01944361003766766
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farley, R., Fielding, E. L., & Krysan, M. (1997). The residential preferences of blacks and whites: A four-metropolis analysis. Housing Policy Debate, 8(4), 763–800. doi:10.1080/10511482.1997.9521278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank, L., Engelke, P., & Schmid, T. (2003). Health and community design: The impact of the built environment on physical activity. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frank, L. D., Kershaw, S. E., Chapman, J. E., Campbell, M., & Swinkels, H. M. (2014). The unmet demand for walkability: Disparities between preferences and actual choices for residential environments in Toronto and Vancouver. Canadian Journal of Public Health. Revue Canadienne De Sante Publique, 106(1), 12–20. doi:10.17269/cjph.106.4397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank, L. D., Schmid, T. L., Sallis, J. F., Chapman, J., & Saelens, B. E. (2005). Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 117–125. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilderbloom, J. (2008). Invisible city: Poverty, housing and new urbanism. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilderbloom, J. I., Ambrosius, J. D., Squires, G. D., Hanka, M. J., & Kenitzer, Z. E. (2012). Investors: The missing piece in the foreclosure racial gap debate. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(5), 559–582. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00619.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilderbloom, J. I., & Appelbaum, R. P. (1988). Rethinking rental housing. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilderbloom, J. I., Riggs, W. W., & Meares, W. L. (2015). Does walkability matter? An examination of walkability’s impact on housing values, foreclosures and crime. Cities, 42, 13–24. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2014.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handy, S. (1993). Regional versus local accessibility: implications for nonwork travel. Transportation Research Record, 1400, 58–66.
   Google Scholar
• Handy, S., Sallis, J. F., Weber, D., Maibach, E., & Hollander, M. (2008). Is support for traditionally designed communities growing? Evidence from two national surveys. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(2), 209–221. doi:10.1080/01944360802010418
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanka, M. J. (2009). From vice to nice: A case study of Newport, Kentucky’s HOPE VI program ( doctoral dissertation). Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.
   Google Scholar
• Hickey, R., Lubell, J., Haas, P., & Morse, S. (2012). Losing ground: The struggle of moderate-income households to afford the rising costs of housing and transportation. Retrieved from http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1218600
   Google Scholar
• Holin, M., Buron, L., Locke, G., & Cortes, A. (2003). Interim assessment of the HOPE VI program cross-site report. Available at SSRN 1760002.
   Google Scholar
• Ioannides, Y. M., & Zabel, J. E. (2008). Interactions, neighborhood selection and housing demand. Journal of Urban Economics, 63(1), 229–252. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2007.01.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random.
   Google Scholar
• Kain, J. F., & Quigley, J. M. (1975). Introduction to “Housing Markets and Racial Discrimination”: A microeconomic analysis. In J. F. Kain & J. M. Quigley (Eds.), Housing markets and racial discrimination: A microeconomic analysis (pp. 1–8). NBER.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, B. (2010). The origins of hope VI. In H. G. Cisneros & L. Engdahl (Eds.), From despair to hope: Hope VI and the new promise of public housing in America’s cities. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• King, K. E., & Clarke, P. J. (2014). A disadvantaged advantage in walkability: Findings from socioeconomic and geographical analysis of national built environment data in the United States. American Journal of Epidemiology, 181(1):17–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleit, R. G. (2005). HOPE VI new communities: Neighborhood relationships in mixed-income housing. Environment and Planning A, 37(8), 1413–1441. doi:10.1068/a3796
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krysan, M., & Farley, R. (2001). The residential preferences of blacks: Do they explain persistent segregation? Social Forces, 80(3), 937–980. doi:10.1353/sof.2002.0011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leinberger, C., & Alfonzo, M. (2012). Walk this way: The economic promise of walkable places in metropolitan. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Leslie, E., Saelens, B., Frank, L., Owen, N., Bauman, A., Coffee, N., & Hugo, G. (2005). Residents’ perceptions of walkability attributes in objectively different neighbourhoods: A pilot study. Health & Place, 11(3), 227–236. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2004.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W., Joh, K., Lee, C., Kim, J. H., Park, H., & Woo, A. (2015). Assessing benefits of neighborhood walkability to single-family property values a spatial hedonic study in austin, texas. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 35(4), 471–488. doi:10.1177/0739456X15591055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litman, T. (2003). Economic value of walkability. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1828, 3–11. doi:10.3141/1828-01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litman, T. A. (2011). Economic value of walkability. World Transport Policy & Practice, 10(1), 5–14.
   Google Scholar
• Louisville Mertro Housing Authority. (2015). HOPE VI programs. Retrieved from http://www.lmha1.org/hope_vi/index.php
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, J. W., & Turnbull, G. K. (2007). Neighborhood street layout and property value: The interaction of accessibility and land use mix. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 35(2), 111–141. doi:10.1007/s11146-007-9035-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meares, W. L. (2014). The walkable dividend: The impacts of walkability on housing and socio-economic composition in Louisville, KY (doctoral dissertation). Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.
   Google Scholar
• Meares, W. L., Gilderbloom, J. I., Squires, G. D., & Williamson, T. (2015). Can renewal happen without removal? Case study of a poor black neighborhood on the rebound. Community Development, 46(2), 111-132. doi:10.1080/15575330.2015.1008533
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meen, D., & Meen, G. (2003). Social behaviour as a basis for modelling the urban housing market: A review. Urban Studies, 40(5–6), 917–935. doi:10.1080/0042098032000074245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moudon, A. V., Lee, C., Cheadle, A. D., Garvin, C., Johnson, D., Schmid, T. L., … Lin, L. (2006). Operational definitions of walkable neighborhood: Theoretical and empirical insights. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 3, S99. doi:10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s99
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Orszag, P., Barnes, M., Carrion, A., & Summers, L. (2009). Developing effective place-based policies for the FY 2011 budget: Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Washington, DC: US Office of Management and Budget, the White House.
   Google Scholar
• Pivo, G., & Fisher, J. D. (2011). The walkability premium in commercial real estate investments. Real Estate Economics, 39(2), 185–219. doi:10.1111/reec.2011.39.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popkin, S. J, Buron, L. F, Levy, D. K, & Cunningham, M. K. (2000). The gautreaux legacy: what might mixed‐income and dispersal strategies mean for the poorest public housing tenants? Housing Policy Debate, 11(4), 911-942. doi:10.1080/10511482.2000.9521392
   Google Scholar
• Popkin, S. J., Katz, B., Cunningham, M., Brown, K. D., Gustafson, J., & Turner, M. (2004). A decade of hope VI: Research findings and policy challenges. Washington, DC: Urban Institute and Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Popkin, S. J., Levy, D. K., & Buron, L. (2009). Has hope Vi transformed residents’ lives? New evidence from the hope Vi panel study. Housing Studies, 24(4), 477–502. doi:10.1080/02673030902938371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggs, W. (2011a). Going home again. Berkeley Planning Journal, 23, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Riggs, W. W. (2011b). Walkability and housing: A comparative study of income, neighborhood change and socio-cultural dynamics in the San Francisco bay area ( doctoral dissertation). Berkeley, CA: University of California Berkley.
   Google Scholar
• Riggs, W. (2014). Steps toward validity in active living research: Research design that limits accusations of physical determinism. Health & Place, 26, 7–13. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothstein, J. (2011). Unemployment insurance and job search in the Great Recession (No. w17534). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, R. J. (2012). Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schutt, R. K. (2011). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. Pine Thousand Oaks, CA: Forge Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, A. E., Ellen, I. G., Voicu, I., & Schill, M. H. (2006). The external effects of place-based subsidized housing. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36(6), 679–707. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2006.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Southworth, M. (2005). Designing the walkable city. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 131(4), 246–257. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2005)131:4(246)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speck, J. (2012). Walkable city: How downtown can save America, one-step at a time. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Steinberg, S. (2010). The myth of concentrated poverty. In C. Hartman & G. Squires (Eds.), The integration debate: Competing futures for American cities (pp. 213–227). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Talen, E. (2010). The context of diversity: A study of six Chicago neighbourhoods. Urban Studies, 47(3), 486–513. doi:10.1177/0042098009349778
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talen, E., & Koschinsky, J. (2011). Is subsidized housing in sustainable neighborhoods? Evidence from Chicago. Housing Policy Debate, 21(1), 1–28. doi:10.1080/10511482.2010.533618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talen, E., Menozzi, S., & Schaefer, C. (2015). What is a “Great Neighborhood”? An analysis of APA’s top-rated places. Journal of the American Planning Association, 81(2), 121–141. doi:10.1080/01944363.2015.1067573
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turbov, M., & Piper, V. (2005). HOPE VI and mixed-finance redevelopments: A catalyst for neighborhood renewal. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, M. A., Nichols, A., & Comey, J. (2012). Benefits of living in high-opportunity neighborhoods: Insights from the moving to opportunity demonstration. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412648 Benefits-of-Living-in-High-Opportunity-Neighborhoods.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Turner, M. A., & Popkin, S. J. (2010). Why housing choice and mobility matter. Washington, DC: Urban institute.
   Google Scholar
• Varady, D. P., Raffel, J. A., Sweeney, S., & Denson, L. (2005). Attracting middle‐income families in the HOPE VI public housing revitalization program. Journal of Urban Affairs, 27(2), 149–164. doi:10.1111/juaf.2005.27.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walfoort, N. L., Clark, J. J., Bostock, M. J., & O’Neil, K. (2009). ACTIVE Louisville: Incorporating active living principles into planning and design. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37(6), S368–S376. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.09.007
   Google Scholar
• Washington, E. (2013). Role of walkability in driving home values. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 13(3), 123–130. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000222
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, W. J. (1978). The declining significance of race. Society, 15(2), 56-62. doi:10.1007/BF03181003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, W. J. (2011). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: NY Vintage.
   Google Scholar
• Zielenbach, S. (2002). The economic impact of HOPE VI on neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Housing Research Foundation. Retrieved from http://www. housingresearch. org
   Google Scholar
• Zielenbach, S. (2003). Assessing economic change in HOPE VI neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate, 14(4), 621-655. doi:10.1080/10511482.2003.9521489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zielenbach, S., & Voith, R. (2010). HOPE VI and neighborhood economic development: The importance of local market dynamics. Cityscape, 12, 99–131.
   Google Scholar