Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:12:54.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neighborhood Parks and Residential Property Values in Greenville, South Carolina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Molly Espey  and
Kwame Owusu-Edusei
Molly Espey
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Kwame Owusu-Edusei
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effect on housing prices of proximity to different types of parks is estimated using a unique data set of single-family homes sold between 1990 and 1999 in Greenville, South Carolina. While the value of park proximity is found to vary with respect to park size and amenities, the estimates from this study are larger than previous studies. The greatest impact on housing values was found with proximity to small neighborhood parks, with the positive impact of proximity to both small and medium-size parks extending to homes as far as 1500 feet from the park.

Keywords

hedonic valuationopen spaceurban parksvalue of parks
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , December 2001 , pp. 487 - 492
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, G. and Bennett, L. L. “Valuing Open Space and Land-Use Patterns in Urban Watersheds”, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 22, 2/3(2001):238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, R. “Legislative Update”, South Carolina Out of Doors, November/December, 2000.Google Scholar
Bolitzer, B. and Netusil, N.R. “The Impact of Open Spaces on Property Values in Portland, Oregon”, Journal of Environmental Management 59(2000):185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correli, M.R., Lillydahl, J.H. and Singell, L.D. “The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open Space”, Land Economics 54(1978):207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Do, A.Q. and Grudnitski, G. “Golf Courses and Residential House Prices: An Empirical Examination”, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 10(1995):261–270.Google Scholar
Doss, C.R. and Taff, S.J. “The Relationship of Property Values and Wetlands Proximity in Ramsey County, Minnesota”, Economic Report 93-4, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1993.Google Scholar
Frech, H. E. III, and Laffert, R. N. “The Effect of the California Coastal Commission on Housing Prices”, Journal of Urban Economics 6(1984):105–123.Google Scholar
Hairston, Julie B. “Coalition has plan for parks in Atlanta”, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 2, 2001.Google Scholar
Luttik, J. “The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands”, Landscape and Urban Planning 48,3 (2000):161–167.Google Scholar
Lutzenheiser, M. and Netusil, . “The Effect of Open Space Type and Proximity on a Home's Sale Price: Portland, Oregon”, Contemporary Economic Policy 19,3 (2001):291–298.Google Scholar
Manan, B., Polasky, S., and Adams, R.M. “Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach”, Land Economics 76,1(2000):100–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, Dale. “Rec officials want to buy land”, The Greenville News, May 10, 2000, p. Bl.Google Scholar
Romain, L. “Greenville rec chief: Buy land now or miss out”, The Greenville News, March 25, 2000 13A.Google Scholar
The Sierra Club, http://www.sierraclub.org/sprawl/report99/openratings.asp, 1999.Google Scholar
Weicher, J. and Zerbst, R. “The Externalities of Neighborhood Parks: An Empirical Investigation”, Land Economics 49(1973):99–105.Google Scholar