ABSTRACT
If land-use regulations present a constraint on the supply of the alternatives to sprawl, three effects ought to be evident. First, the quantity of compact development ought to be reduced by the regulations (Chapter 3). Second, neighborhoods that have attributes of compactness, walkability, and transit accessibility which are made artificially rare by regulation ought to command a price premium (Eppli and Tu 1999; Tu and Eppli 2001; Song and Knaap 2003). Finally, households faced with constrained choices would be expected to be less satisfied with their choices than households to whom a fuller range of neighborhood types were available; supply constraints would lower the utility that households derive from their housing choices and would leave latent demand for alternative development.
