[2] Jacobs, Jane.  The Death and Life of Great American Cities, 1969. Random House.

[3] Glaeser, Edward L., and others. 1995. “Growth in a Cross-Section of Cities.” Journal of Monetary Economics.

[4] Shapiro, Jesse 2006.  Smart cities: Quality of life, productivity, and the growth effects of human capital. Review of Economics and Statistics, May 2006

[5] Becker, Gary, and Casey Mulligan:. 1997. “The Endogenous Determination of Time Preference.”” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 112, no. 3.(1997), pp.: 729-7–58.
 
[6] Moretti (2004).
 
[7] Kahn, Matthew, and John Matsusaka:. (1997). “Environmental Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence From Voting Patterns on California Voting Initiatives.” Journal of Law and Economics , XL,40, 1: 137-1–73.
 
[8] Jordan Rappaport, Jeffrey D. Sachs, “The United States as a Coastal Nation,” Journal of Economic Growth, Volume 8, Issue 1, March 2003. Glaeser, Edward L. and Jesse Shapiro. “Urban growth in the 1990s: Is city living back?” Journal of Regional Science, February 2003.

[9] Glaeser, Edward L, Joseph Gyourko and Raven Saks.  (2005) “Why is Manhattan So Expensive?  Regulation and the Rise in House Prices,” Journal of Law and Economics, Glaeser, Edward L, and Joseph Gyourko.  (2005) “Urban Decline and Durable Housing,” Journal of Political Economy.

[10] Thomas Schelling shared the 2005 Nobel Prize in Economics for his work applying game theory to the real world. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2005/schelling-lecture.html.  See Paul Krugman’s New York Times piece “The New York Paradox”.  Krugman discusses why corporate bosses are increasingly likely to locate in downtown Manhattan while sending their middle management to work at cheaper suburban office towers (July 10th 2006).

[11] A frontier research question would be to parse out the price premium into that piece due to demand side objective improvements in quality of life caused by the growth controls versus the supply side effects of inhibiting developers from building. 

[12] Glaeser, Gyourko, and Saks (2005) argue that several factors have contributed to the man-made scarcity of housing.  Judges and local government officials have become increasingly sympathetic to community and environmental concerns when considering new housing developments. Zoning has become more restrictive.  Bribery, they suggest, has become a less effective method for persuading officials to permit development.  The increasing share of Americans who own homes has given homeowners more political clout, and homeowners have an incentive to limit the supply of new housing.  Finally, rising education levels and the lessons learned from other political battles, such as the civil rights movement, have made community members more adept at using courts and the press to battle development.  

[13] Zabel, Jeff and RW Paterson. “The Effects of Critical Habitat Designation on Housing Supply: An Analysis of California Housing Construction Activity,” Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 46, No. 1. (February 2006), pp. 67-95.

[14] In the case of Vancouver, in its downtown there is a 1,000 acre waterfront park.  Perhaps not coincidently, this green city has the highest property prices in Canada with an average home costing $466,000 (see the July 8th 2006 issue of The Economist and the story titled “Growing Pains”).

[15] On Saturday July 29th 2006, the New York Times published a letter by Brad Johnson of San Francisco. He writes “Is Edward L. Glaeser … suggesting that middle-class people who can’t afford to live in the cities should just move out, live in the suburbs and shop at Wal-Mart?  Perhaps families squeezed by rents in the city don’t want to move out. Perhaps they would like to enjoy the culture and opportunities that a large city provides. What has the middle class done to deserve exile?”

[16] Bertaud, Alain. “Clearing the Air in Atlanta: Transit and Smart Growth or Conventional Economics?”  Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 54, no. 3, November 2003, pp. 379-400