The value of a view

Aims and method:

Estimates the value of views in single-family residential real estate markets in Bellingham, Washington, a city with a variety of views, including ocean, lake, and mountain. The method used a dataset of 7,305 transactions of housing over an eleven year period and an hedonic pricing model that allowed for differentiation of views by both type and quality.

Key findings:

· Depending on the particular view, willingness to pay for a good view can be high.

· The highest-quality ocean views are found to increase the market price of an otherwise comparable home by almost 60%; the lowest-quality ocean views still add about 8%.

Reference:

Benson, E. D., Hansen, J. L., Schwartz, Jr, A. L., & Smersh, G. T. (1998). Pricing residential amenities: the value of a view. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 16(1), 55-73.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1007785315925?LI=true

City trees and property value

Aims and method:

Evaluates the added value to properties by greening. The research reviews a set of studies that used Hedonic pricing methods to explore the relationship.

Key findings:

· Trees and forest cover in development growth areas (internationally) adds value to development parcels

· Homes with trees are generally preferred to comparable homes without trees, with the trend across studies suggesting a price increase of about 7%.

· The studies reviewed here indicated 2% increase when mature yard trees are greater than 9-inch dbh; 3-5% increase when trees are part of front yard landscaping; 6-9% increase when there is good tree cover in a neighbourhood ;10-15% increase when there are mature trees in a high income neighbourhood

· Market price studies of treed versus un-treed lots show: 18% price increase for building lots with substantial mature tree cover; 22% price increase in tree-covered undeveloped acreage; 19-35% price increase in lots bordering suburban wooded preserves; 37% price increase when development is within open land that is two thirds wooded.

Reference:

Wolf, K. L. (2007). City trees and property values. Arborist News, 16(4), 34-36.

http://www.naturewithin.info/Policy/FMJ_City%20Trees_Property%20Values.pdf

Air pollution, nature and housing value

Aims and method:

Property value data and hedonic pricing models are used to examine consumers' underlying preferences for various amenities and accessibility factors in Salt Lake County (USA), with a particular focus on air pollution and forest coverage. Three forms of regression analysis are used to understand the patterns of spatial heterogeneity in preferences.

Key findings:

· Results from ordinary least squares (OLS) regression show that single-family home values are affected not only by structural attributes, but also by urban amenities and accessibility factors such as air pollution, forest coverage, quality of public schools, and commuting cost.

· After controlling the covariates in spatial lag regression, air pollution and the lack of forest coverage have the most significant and detrimental effect on housing values over time.

· Results from geographically weighted regression indicate that spatial heterogeneity is evident. However, air pollutions and forest cover matter irrespective of the method used.

Reference:

Li, H., Wei, Y. D., Yu, Z., & Tian, G. (2016). Amenity, accessibility and housing values in metropolitan USA: A study of Salt Lake County, Utah. Cities, 59, 113-125.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275116302888

The value of open space in residential areas

Aims and method:

Asks if structural green space adds value sufficient to offset the cost of land devoted to it. Based on a case study of a Radburn style development in Dallas, the research uses sales and interview data to explore the relationship.

Key findings:

· The greenways were used for aesthetic purposes and function as spaces for exercise and play

· Homeowners value the open space - both those who live directly on the internal greenways and those who do not.

· However, where the open space causes a reduction in private backyard space, homeowners do not appear to value public open space as highly as private space

Reference:

Peiser, R. B., & Schwann, G. M. (1993). The private value of public open space within subdivisions. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 10(2): 91-104.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/43028735?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

The value of parks

Aims and method:

Reviews the economic, environmental and social value of green spaces in cities. The report focuses on eight case studies and evaluates the benefits of the green spaces through eight case studies and a combination of qualitative interviews and a property valuation exercise.

Key findings:

· There is a positive relationship in value associated with residential properties overlooking or being close to a high quality park. These premiums associated with the park do vary according to the type of park, the layout of property, the nature of the location and to some extent the nature of the local population and the type of property involved.

· Houses close to parks average 8% higher prices than similar properties further away

· Relatively higher values can be seen where properties face onto a road that overlooks the park rather than backing on to it.

Reference:

CABE Space (2005). Does money grow on trees?. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk/files/does-money-grow-on-trees.pdf

Open space types and housing value

Aims and method:

Explores the relationship between a home's sale price and its proximity to different open spaces types using a data set comprised of single-family home sales in the city of Portland, within Multnomah County, between 1990 and 1992. Hedonic pricing is used to examine a dataset of some 16,636 single-family home sales.

Key findings:

· The type and size of open spaces matter and not just their proximity.

· All open space types are estimated to have a positive statistically significant effect for homes that are adjacent (within 200 feet) of the open space.

· Natural area parks are estimated, on average, to have the largest statistically significant effect on a home’s sale price.

· Golf courses, specialty parks/facilities, and urban parks are also found to have a positive statistically significant effect on a home’s sale price.

Reference:

Lutzenhiser, M. & Netusil, N. (2001) The effect of open spaces on a home’s sale price, Contemporary Economic Policy, 19(3): 291-298

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1093/cep/19.3.291/abstract

Public green space and property value

Aims and method:

Surveyed the relationship between the average house prices of 76 residential areas and 14 parks in Beijing, and measured the total benefits of 18,070 ha public green spaces on residential property value. The research uses inventory data of urban green spaces (2009) and GIS techniques combined with a hedonic pricing model.

Key findings:

· Residential property values located 850-1604 meters away from parks achieved a 0.5% to 14.1% increase in sales price.

· The overall benefit of Beijing’s public green spaces on residential property was 2.86 billion CNY (1 USD=6.83 CNY), and the average benefit of per hectare public green space was 0.16 million CNY, corresponding to 1.8-3.9 times of the maintenance cost of green space in Beijing.

Reference:

Zhang, B., Xie, G., Xia, B. & Zhang C. (2012) The Effects of Public Green Spaces on Residential Property Value in Beijing, Journal of Resources and Ecology, 3(3): 243-252

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236165997_The_Effects_of_Public_Green_Spaces_on_Residential_Property_Value_in_Beijing

Green space availability and residential value

Aims and method:

Using a hedonic pricing specification, this paper measures the proximate effect of public green space on residential property value. It examines the relationship between 3,854 residential sales transactions and public green spaces across the Belfast (UK) housing market gathered from Land and Property Services throughout the year 2011 showing the percentage effect on property value with respect to distance to public green space

Key findings:

· Urban green space has a significant positive impact on proximate residential properties sale price for the terrace and apartment sectors

· Terrace and apartment property located closer to public green spaces achieved increases in sale price of up to 49 per cent.

· There were limited statistically significant proximate effects evident for the detached and semi-detached sectors, suggesting that those who already have their own green space (gardens) value public green space less

Reference:

McCord, J., McCord, M., McCluskey, W., Davis, P., Mcllhatton, D., & Haran, M. (2014) Effect of public green space on residential property values in Belfast metropolitan area, Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 19(2): 117-137

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JFMPC-04-2013-0008

Valuing greenness

Aims and method:

Provides an update of a 2003 study Valuing Greenness: Green spaces, house prices and Londoners’ priorities. This research builds on the original study with better green space data and a wider range of built environment and locational factors analysed at a more detailed

Key findings:

· The most important factors influencing house prices relate to physical built environment housing qualities, particularly house size and age, with larger older housing being much more desirable.

· Access to parks is correlated with built environment factors, such as housing type and size, and is negatively correlated with deprivation. The inclusion of socio-economic and built environment variables in the model reduces the strength of the correlations between green space and average house prices.

· Each hectare of park space within 1km of housing increases house prices by 0.08%.

· The presence of a regional or metropolitan park within 600 metres was found to add between 1.9% and 2.9% to total house value.

Reference:

Smith, D. (2010). Valuing housing and green spaces: Understanding local amenities, the built environment and house prices in London.

https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/gla_migrate_files_destination/GLAE-wp-42.pdf

Valuing open space continuity

Aims and method:

Analyses the structuring of open space in Flanders (Belgium), and seeks to understand how the size of open space units and its spatial fragmentation affects their perceived value. Uses a quantitative and geospatial approach at the macro scale and a qualitative approach at the micro or local level. It focuses on Woluweveld, a Flemish site located close to Brussels.

Key findings:

· Larger and contiguous open spaces in the rural area tend to be valued higher than smaller open spaces in urban fringe areas.

· When open space is judged according to criteria expressed by stakeholders and communities in the urban fringe, however, small spatial units are estimated as being particularly valuable leading to a ‘fragmentation bias’.

Reference:

Dewaelheyns, V., Vanempten, E., Bomans, K., Verhoeve, A., & Gulinck, H. (2014). The Fragmentation Bias in Valuing and Qualifying Open Space. Journal of Urban Design, 19(4), 436-455.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13574809.2014.923741?journalCode=cjud20

Private versus public open space

Aims and method:

Explores the value of open spaces and whether households would be willing to trade off the size of their own lot for open space in the subdivision. The study includes 3,386 individual house sales within eighty-nine, subdivisions.

Key findings:

· A 10% increase in private lot size is associated with an approximately 0.6% increase in house price.

· Increasing open space acreage from 20 to 30 acres would increase sales price by 0.5%.

· Adjacency to subdivision open space has a positive effect on house price and there is some small willingness to trade off lot size for more subdivision open space.

Reference:

Kopits, E., McConnell, V., & Walls, M. (2007). The trade-off between private lots and public open space in subdivisions at the urban-rural fringe. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89(5), 1191-1197.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/30139460?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents