Name of presentation Month 2009
Property value benefits of leafy streets : Brisbane case study
Lyndal Plant, Ph.D - School of Geography, Planning & Environmental Management
Name of presentation Month 2009
Street trees - streetscapes
Name of presentation Month 2009
Shenyang, China.
Name of presentation Month 2009
Name of presentation Month 2009
Drivers Benefits Barriers
• Pollution
• Biodiversity
• Urban development
• Community health
• Water management
• Climate change
• Population growth/
densification
• Heritage & history
• Liveability, sense of
place
• Traffic congestion
Environmental • shade and cooling Community • Comfortable shaded
pathways- walking & cycling
Economic • Property value
benefits/property tax returns
• Competition for space
• Competition for
funds • Street trees nice to
have- not essential infrastructure
• Community
preferences??
Name of presentation Month 2009
63.9%&10.9%&
25.2%&
Case study city: Brisbane
City-wide 51% tree cover Residential areas 35% tree cover
Name of presentation Month 2009
Effects of development time & type on tree cover on private residential property in 2010 – Brisbane. (Daniel, C. 2012)
Pre-war 37% Early Post-war (50s-60s) 33.6% Late Post-war (70s-80s) 35.2% Modern (1990s) 25.4% 2000-2005
Greenfield dwellings 17.3% Infill dwellings 20.2% Multiple Unit-dwellings 4.2%
Name of presentation Month 2009
Name of presentation Month 2009
Neighbourhood Shadeways – 50% tree shade cover along resi footpaths and park pathways by 2031 (35% av. in 2010, ? in 2014)
Street with about 60-70% footpath tree cover
Turning shade-hungry footpaths & ……..park paths, into shady, green, cool, attractive …….. walking and cycling routes
Name of presentation Month 2009
Quantifying and valuing urban forest benefits
• Measuring and monetising ecosystem services of urban forests
• “Green accounting”, building awareness, identifying opportunities and forecasting scenarios
Name of presentation Month 2009
Name of presentation Month 2009
Study data
House&a1ributes&
Property&a1ributes&
Tree&a1ributes& Suburb&A1ributes&
!Sale&price&!Transfer&date&!Number&of&bedrooms&!Number&of&bathrooms&!Number&of&car/garage&spaces&&&&&
!Property&size&!Proximity&to&park&!Size&of&the&nearest&park&!Proximity&to&shops&!Proximity&to&heavy&industry&!Proximity&to&busy&road&
!&Tree&cover&on&the&property&!&Tree&canopy&cover&within&30&and&100m&of&the&house&sale&!Tree&canopy&cover&in&nearest&park&!&Tree&canopy&cover&on&front&footpath&!&Tree&canopy&cover&on&footpath&within&30m&&and&100m&of&house&sale&(excl&frontage)&&&
!Age&of&suburb&!Household&income&!Household&educaGon&!Proximity&to&CBD&&&
Name of presentation Month 2009
Name of presentation Month 2009
Attributes of significance
House&a1ributes&
Property&a1ributes&
Tree&a1ributes& Suburb&A1ributes&
!Sale&price&!Transfer&date&!Number&of&bedrooms&!Number&of&bathrooms&!Number&of&car/garage&spaces&&&&&
!Property&size&!Proximity&to&park&!Size&of&the&nearest&park&!Proximity&to&shops&!Proximity&to&heavy&industry&!Proximity&to&busy&road&
!&Tree&cover&on&the&property&!&Tree&canopy&cover&within&30&and&100m&of&the&house&sale&!Tree&canopy&cover&in&nearest&park&!&Tree&canopy&cover&on&front&footpath&!&Tree&canopy&cover&on&footpath&within&30m&&and&100m&of&house&sale&(excl&frontage)&&&
!Age&of&suburb&!Household&income&!Household&educaGon&!Proximity&to&CBD&&&
Name of presentation Month 2009
Tree cover within 30m and 100m of the property
Tree cover on front footpath
Tree cover on footpath within 30m of property
- Tree cover within property
+ Tree cover on footpath within 100m of property
no significant effect - significant negative effect + significant positive effect
Name of presentation Month 2009
Hedonic price model
• ln Pi (House Sale Price) = β0 + δDSaleYr + δDEra + δDParkprox +β1Hi + β2Li + β4Ti + β3Si + εi
• 35% footpath tree cover – added $1,871 (0.35%) to median house sale price in 2010
• 50% or greater footpath tree cover – added $29,000 (5.05%) to sale price
Name of presentation Month 2009
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
$29.5m
$1.67m
-$13m
$0.99m $1.23m
Property value benefits
Environmental benefits
Planting & Maintenance costs
BCC rates revenue
State tax revenue
Name of presentation Month 2009
Brisbane case study - Points of interest
• street trees paying their way in property value benefits alone
• local nuances • street tree(s) out front made no difference • smaller marginal effect of street trees in Brisbane than
other studies
• range of property value/tax beneficiaries and partnership opportunities
• local, revealed, monetised preferences = business case + policy evaluation tool