economic impact of parks 2016

54

Upload: brendan-daley

Post on 15-Apr-2017

16 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 2: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Gia Biagi

Chief of StaffChicago Park District

@civicdesign_lab

[email protected]

CHICAGO

Page 3: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 4: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

50

77

234

WARDS

COMMUNITIES

SQUARE MILES

Page 5: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

550

Page 6: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

7,000employees

Page 7: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Learning Objectives

Why economic impact is important

Measuring value through tourism

Measuring value through property

Page 8: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Florida tourism 2014 – 93.7 million visitors

$82 billion in spending

$4.9 billion in tax revenues

State parks June 2013 – July 2014

27.1 million visitors

$2.1 billion in economic impact

Supports 29,396 jobs for Floridians

Page 9: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Golden Gate Park 13M visitors

Magic Kingdom 19.3M visitors

Chicago Park District 40M

Central Park 40M visitors

National Parks 292.8M visitors

2014 snapshot

Page 10: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Economic impact of over $1,174,848,582

$75,771,234 state sales taxes generated

More than 500 jobs were created

Florida state parks receive NO general revenue funds and they raise 64% of their operating costs through entry and camping fees, concessionaire income sharing and other partnerships.

2013 - http://friendsoffloridastateparks.org/page-1771423

Page 11: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 12: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 13: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 14: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 15: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 16: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 17: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 18: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Parks are an economic driver for the town, village or city.

What is our impact?

How do we measure it?

Page 19: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

The approach

Economic impact of the parks

Park District non-tax revenues

Park District strategic metrics

Case studies

Page 20: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Impact of tourism

Page 21: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

The approach

Revenues generated by major events, special assets, and tourism are estimated in four key analyses

Major Park Events

Museum Revenues

Harbor Revenues

Incremental Tourism

Page 22: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 24: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 25: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 26: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 27: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 28: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Park events drive a positive impact

Events and museums

Incremental tourism

Music festivals and sports

While direct revenue may

be small, indirect impact

can be significant

Page 29: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Direct revenue Actual revenue

ticket prices

attendance

concessions and merchandise

Estimated revenue

attendees x (avg ticket price + avg merch & concessions)

(attendees x avg ticket price) + (total merch & concessions)

(total ticket spend) + (attendees x avg merch & concessions spend)

total ticket spend + total merch spend

Page 30: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Indirect revenue Depending on available data either:

(#attendees x %tourists) x (spend per visitor per day x length of stay attributable to event)

total tourism spend outside event

Depending on the nature of the event, number of days of attributable tourism impact differs:

Typically 1 day of visitor spending for each day visitor attends event

Marathon and Triathlon are 2 days of visitor spending outside event

Page 31: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Parks increase tourism overall Number one factor in destination selection for leisure

travelers is a location that is “beautiful or scenic”

Parks play a major role in making Chicago more beautiful and scenic, and therefore help influence Chicago’s tourism

Museums draw tourists to Chicago, with 56% of cultural travelers rating museums as “important”

Page 32: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Total Impact

Page 33: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Grant Park and Soldier Field

Jackson

Burnham1)

Washington

Humboldt

Union

Northerly Island

Lincoln

Soldier Field 23249 83 100

Grant 31434 63 217

Incremental tourismDirect rev - non-touristsDirect rev - tourists

2

2

142 6 6

346 12 16

452 12 32

0.3

30.03

0.4 2.0

4

63 5 14

2

Page 34: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 35: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Music festivals and sports

Page 36: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Music festivals and sports

44

211

Chicago

Marathon

15

44

6

Blues

Festival

33

36

25

Northerly

Island

Concerts

34

6

12

16

Taste of

Chicago

98

7

15

76

Soldier

Field

(Non-

Bears)

113

19

16

78

Soldier

Field

(Bears’

Games)

119

30

67

22

Lollapalooza

127

17

30

80

Chicago

Air &

Water

Show

31

Direct rev - tourists

Direct rev - non-tourists

Incremental tourism

Page 37: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 38: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Impact to property value Assessed value scaled up to

market value

Controlled for factors

Statistically significant

43% of all residential properties

in Chicago

Page 39: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Methodology

Based on the application of hedonic pricing method

Based on a conservative approach, consistent with economic theory

1 2 3 4 5Property pricing regression

Definition of "park markets"

Data clean-up

Acquisition of necessary data

Measure of total impact by park

Page 40: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Park markets Analyze the environment around each park and note

confounding attributes

Using Google Earth, draw the park market so as to include only similarly-situated properties

The resulting park markets were oftentimes narrowly defined

Therefore, create a broader market to encompass all properties that have reasonable access to the park, regardless confounding attributes

Page 41: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 42: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 43: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Narrowly defined market

Page 44: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Broadly defined market

Page 45: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Impact to property value

0.10 – 0.15 miles

0.05 – 0.10 miles

Zero – 0.05 miles +2% or $255.8M

+1.64% or $376.4M

+1.12% or $276.9M

Page 46: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Total and relative impact by category

Page 47: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Mini-parks

> 141 parks or 24% of all parks

> Less than 1% of all acreage, but over 35% of total dollar impact

> Have above average percentage impact across the city

> Less numerous in south/southwest side

Other ParksMini-parks

Page 48: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Overall impact to property value

Positive and significant

Properties within 0.15 miles of a park 1.5% higher on average

$909 M in aggregate

43% of residential properties

Positive impact is consistent across park types and regions

Page 49: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Lessons learned Parks add to property value

Parks positively impact tourism

Positive impact across all park categories – although with differentiated intensity

Magnet parks add the most absolute value per park for both property value and tourism impact

Mini-parks (25% of all parks) add the most relative impact to property value

Page 50: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Generate the largest share of non-tax revenues

Highly attractive for engaging tourists and residents alike

Have the highest property value impact on the city

Residents primarily benefit through access to green spaces in urban neighborhoods

Generate the most community engagement through programming and special events

Positive community engagement and property value improvement, despite minimal ongoing investment

Attractions Mini-parks Amenities Open space

Assets can be managed as a portfolio

Page 51: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 52: Economic Impact of Parks 2016
Page 53: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Your next steps … Identify your data sources

Government agency that assesses property value

Identify resources

Local universities with GIS or Planning students

Local realtor associations

Identify confounding factors around your park

Commercial corridors

Trains, waterways, interstates

Other parks

Page 54: Economic Impact of Parks 2016

Brendan Daley, CPRP, LEED AP O&M

Director of Strategy & Sustainability

Chicago Park District

[email protected]

On Twitter @parksgreenguy

Thank you.