Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 74
Microsimulation of Single-Family Residential Land Use for Market Equilibriums Bin (Brenda) Zhou, University of Texas at Austin Kara M. Kockelman, University of Texas at Austin This paper investigates single-family residential develop- reported in de la Barra 1989), which was followed by the ment for housing market equilibriums by using micro- urban examples of Wingo (1961) and Alonso (1964). economic theory and disaggregate spatial data. A logit These early models treat land as homogeneous and con- model and notions of price competition are used to sim- tinuous and recognize only one employment center. ulate household location choices in six scenarios, with Moreover, they neglect taste heterogeneity. either one or multiple employment centers and with low, The Herbert and Stevens model (1960) determined medium, and high value-of-travel-time assumptions. residential prices by maximizing aggregate rents subject Consistent with bidrent theory, housing market equilib- to constraints on (total) land availability and the number rium for each scenario was reached in an iterative fash- of households to be accommodated. Senior and Wilson ion. The spatial allocation of new households in the (1974) enhanced the HerbertStevens model by adding region of Austin, Texas, illustrated the potential shape of an entropy term to the objective function, reflecting pref- things to come, with endogenously determined home erence dispersion among households. Both models treat prices and demographic distributions. spatial elements in an aggregate manner, using an exhaustive zone-based subdivision of the region. Recent, more-advanced models (e.g., Anas and Xu 1999 and Chang and Mackett 2005) depict household distribution A s an essential part of urban travel behaviors, pre- via general equilibrium and land usetransportation diction of future land use patterns is of great inter- interactions. However, their complexity has greatly lim- est to policy makers, developers, planners, ited their application. transportation engineers, and others. Residential land is in In contrast to the earlier models and methods, this the range of 60% of developed land, dominating urban investigation emphasizes parcel-level data [geographic areas. Moreover, the emergence of commercial, industrial, information system (GIS) encoded] and considers taste office, and civic uses is spatially correlated with residential heterogeneity of individual households via behavioral development (e.g., Zhou and Kockelman 2005). controls for demographic variables and random utility Numerous factors contribute to the complexity of maximization. The model applied here relies on bidrent housing location choices (e.g., Irwin and Bockstael 2004 theory, which is both theoretically meaningful and prac- and Bina and Kockelman 2006). Microeconomic theory tically feasible. This work examines single-family resi- tested with disaggregate spatial data offers behavioral dential land development on the basis of a microscopic foundations and a better understanding of such deci- equilibrium of the housing market for recent movers. sions. These theories of land use can be traced back to Each home-seeking household is allocated to the loca- the concept of agricultural rents and travel costs around tion that offers it the highest utility, and each new home a market center proposed by Von Thünen (1826, as is occupied by the highest bidder. This process ensures 63