12 



PARKS 



REPORTS OF PROPERTY VALUES INCREASED BY PARKS 



Extract from the Annual Report of the Board of Park 

 Commissioners, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1925: 



"The people of our city are, as a majority, not 

 aware of the fact that from the viewpoint of mone- 

 tary interest alone, the park system has cost the city 

 nothing, because the increased property values pro- 

 duced on account of the park system are several times 

 the amount of the total investment of $15,240,000 

 made during the Board's administration of forty-two 

 years. Moreover, what is the monetary value of our 

 park system as compared to the value of the great 

 joy, pleasure, and good health which these facilities 

 for outdoor recreation afford to the people?" 



Extract from "Parks as Investments," published by 

 the Metropolitan Conference of City and State Park 

 Authorities, New York City, New York, February, 1926: 



"Comptroller Hawes, writing in 1856, shortly after 

 the city acquired title to Central Park, said the in- 

 crease in taxes by reason of the enhancement of val- 

 ues due to the park, would afford more than sufficient 

 means for the interest incurred for its purchase and 

 improvement without any increase in the general rate 

 of taxation. And the New Parks Commission quoted 

 figures from the tax returns of the city to show that 

 while the property in the other nineteen wards of the 

 city increased but twofold, the property of the three 

 wards in which Central Park was located advanced 

 from about twenty-six and a half millions to over three 

 hundred and twelve millions. They asserted that 

 whereas before the making of the park, these three 

 wards paid one dollar in every thirteen received as 

 taxes, after the making of the park they paid one- 

 third of the entire expenses of the city and this not- 

 withstanding the fact that the taking of the ground 

 for Central Park removed ten thousand lots from the 

 tax books of the city." 



Extract from an address by Henry f '. Hubbard, Har- 

 vard University, on " Parks and Playgrounds " presented 

 before the International Town Planning Conference, 1924: 



"The same general reasoning applies, of course, to 

 parks, although in their locations there is usually a 

 greater range of choice. They must exist somewhere, 

 and when the best location has been found, then the 

 park must be created, or at any rate the land ac- 

 quired, even if the development of the land as a park 

 must be postponed. There is of course a credit item 

 in the city's accounts that may go far to offset the 

 price paid for the park. After the park is established 

 the land abutting upon it is increased in value, which 

 value comes back to the city in increased taxes; and 

 in addition to this localized increase in values on 

 account of the visible and obvious advantages which 

 accrue to the abutting property, there will also be a 

 general rise of values because the park has raised the 



tone of the city as a whole. The local benefits are less 

 noticeable in the case of playgrounds. Indeed in some 

 of the more desirable residential areas the presence of 

 the playground is considered to lower the value of the 

 abutting property, as the exclusion of playgrounds by 

 zoning ordinance from the most restricted residence 

 districts in several cases would go to show. But wher- 

 ever a playground is necessary, it cannot be denied 

 that its presence raises the values of the whole neigh- 

 borhood. Moreover, in the case of a congested neigh- 

 borhood the land value increase is both local and 

 general, because, however noisy the playground may 

 be, it is less bad than a street and more airy and open 

 than the blocks of tenements which it has replaced." 



Report of the Board of Park Commissioners, Essex 

 County, N. J., 1926: 



In 1916, the Board of Park Commissioners in Essex 

 County engaged the services of an expert to make a 

 report as to the actual value in dollars and cents of 

 the County Park System. The report was made on 

 four of the Newark parks. The following extract is 

 taken from a summary published in the Newark Sun- 

 day Call: 



"The reports show that the parks themselves have 

 increased in value from $1,000,000 to more than 

 $5,000,000, but this increase of $4,000,000 is not em- 

 phasized, as it is not available for taxing purposes. 

 The property immediately adjoining the four parks 

 named was assessed in 1905 for $4,143,850, and in 

 1916 for $29,266,000, an increase of $25,122,150, or 

 606.3 P er cent. At the same time property in the same 

 taxing district and perhaps not wholly outside of what 

 may be called the 'park influence,' was assessed in 

 1905 at $36,606,907, and in 1916 at $111,531,725, a 

 gain of $74,924,818, or 204.6 percent. In plainer words, 

 while the property adjoining the parks has increased 

 more than six times in value, property in the remain- 

 der of the same taxing districts has about doubled in 

 value. 



"If the increase in valuations adjoining these parks 

 has been the same as in other property in the same 

 taxing districts, and no more, it would have been 

 $8,453,454, leaving an increase as a result of the parks 

 of $16,668,700. The fortunate owners of this property 

 have been enriched by this large sum beyond what 

 they would have been had the parks not been estab- 

 lished. 



"But this is not all. The cost of these four parks 

 was $4,241,540. The increase is enough to pay for 

 them four times. The cost of all the parks in the 

 county was $6,929,625.47 say $7,000,000. The in- 

 crease of property adjoining these four parks alone, 

 beyond what it would have been if the parks had not 

 been constructed, is sufficient to pay for all the parks 

 in the county 2.4 times, and the increase from the 



