Parks and Open Space: The Highest and Best Use of Public Land?
Keywords:park land, open space, cost of community services analysis, fiscal impact analysis, residential development, growth.
AbstractParkland advocates frequently find themselves in conflict with residential developers over the appropriate use for a piece of land. Invariably developers argue that their projects will expand the tax base and, thus, reduce existing residents’ property taxes. The paper summarizes the results from over 70 empirical studies that suggest that instead of leading to a reduction in property taxes, the consequence of residential development is usually a net increase in the property taxes paid by existing residents. These studies have used cost of community services analyses (COCS) to derive their conclusions. They consistently report that over a wide range of residential densities, and especially in rapidly growing communities, the public costs associated with residential development exceed the public revenues that accrue from it. The median net cost of residential development in the over 70 case studies reviewed was 15%. Thus, if the annual tax yield to a community was $1 million from a residential development, the median cost of servicing the development was $1.15 million. In this case, if the operation and maintenance costs associated with using the land as a park or open space were less than $150,000, then it would be a more cost effective use of the land for the community than residential development. Examples are given of communities in which COCS analyses have resulted in decisions to purchase land for open space rather than incur the likely losses from residential development.A detailed review of the COCS case studies revealed three useful insights. First, communities with larger and rapidly growing populations appeared to experience greater net deficits on their residential land than did communities with smaller, more stable populations. Second, the use of a broad residential development category that was adopted in all of these studies often obscures substantial differences within it. For example, it has been shown that the more sprawling the growth, the higher the cost. Third, education costs are the major contributing source to the residential property deficits.These findings provide park advocates with a credible entré into the economic development discussion and enable them to position parks as being a key component in a community’s economic viability. By showing their relative fiscal strength compared to residential development, advocates can refute the notion that parklands are a drain on local resources. The goal is not to prevent growth, but to encourage a balance between development and open space.
Sagamore Publishing LLC (hereinafter the “Copyright Owner”)
Journal Publishing Copyright Agreement for Authors
PLEASE REVIEW OUR POLICIES AND THE PUBLISHING AGREEMENT, AND INDICATE YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE TERMS BY CHECKING THE ‘AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS COPYRIGHT NOTICE’ CHECKBOX BELOW.
I understand that by submitting an article to Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, I am granting the copyright to the article submitted for consideration for publication in Journal of Park and Recreation Administration to the Copyright Owner. If after consideration of the Editor of the Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, the article is not accepted for publication, all copyright covered under this agreement will be automatically returned to the Author(s).
THE PUBLISHING AGREEMENT
Assignment of Copyright
I hereby assign to the Copyright Owner the copyright in the manuscript I am submitting in this online procedure and any tables, illustrations or other material submitted for publication as part of the manuscript in all forms and media (whether now known or later developed), throughout the world, in all languages, for the full term of copyright, effective when the article is accepted for publication.
Reversion of Rights
Articles may sometimes be accepted for publication but later be rejected in the publication process, even in some cases after public posting in “Articles in Press” form, in which case all rights will revert to the Author.
Retention of Rights for Scholarly Purposes
I understand that I retain or am hereby granted the Retained Rights. The Retained Rights include the right to use the Preprint, Accepted Manuscript, and the Published Journal Article for Personal Use and Internal Institutional Use.
All journal material is under a 12 month embargo. Authors who would like to have their articles available as open access should contact Sagamore-Venture for further information.
In the case of the Accepted Manuscript and the Published Journal Article, the Retained Rights exclude Commercial Use, other than use by the author in a subsequent compilation of the author’s works or to extend the Article to book length form or re-use by the author of portions or excerpts in other works.
Published Journal Article: the author may share a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI.
- The Article I have submitted to the journal for review is original, has been written by the stated author(s) and has not been published elsewhere.
- The Article was not submitted for review to another journal while under review by this journal and will not be submitted to any other journal.
- The Article contains no libelous or other unlawful statements and does not contain any materials that violate any personal or proprietary rights of any other person or entity.
- I have obtained written permission from copyright owners for any excerpts from copyrighted works that are included and have credited the sources in the Article.
- If the Article was prepared jointly with other authors, I have informed the co-author(s) of the terms of this Journal Publishing Agreement and that I am signing on their behalf as their agent, and I am authorized to do so.