In doing market appraisals for people, and analysing past sales in the neighbourhood and trying to understand why some properties with similar block sizes and number of bedrooms sold for more and why some sold for less, it seems to me that the amount of through-traffic often has an influence on sales price. There are so many exceptions to the rule that one cannot really call it a rule. There will quite often be affordable homes in dress-circle cul-de-sacs, and quite often be flash houses on noisy roads.
I was looking at the 60 homes in FLYNN which have sold for $1m or more, and I thought that is a pretty decent data set for testing out the hypothesis that properties in quiet streets sell for a little more on average. I realise that there are plenty of limitations with methodology which I have used. But, assuming that there are generally about 8 properties in the average cul-de-sac, about 50 properties in the average loop street, and about 100 properties on the busy roads, then I think the FLYNN data supports this hypothesis. There is also the question of how much of this effect comes from buyers placing more value in a property in a quiet and how much of this comes from people building nicer homes in quiet streets.
To me, there seem to be certain benefits which sometime come from living on a busy street with through traffic, like bus stops, better street lighting, usually reduce crime statistics, and getting your UberEATS a bit warmer. But, in the cul-de-sacs, you can see little kids playing with the neighbours’ kids, and there are dogs walking around safely, simply because there is no through traffic, and it seems to me that some people quite value that. If you (dis)agree, you are very welcome to leave me a comment.