What Advantages Do Adaptive Industrial Heritage Reuse Processes Provide? An Econometric Model for Estimating the Impact on the Surrounding Residential Housing Market
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Background
2.1. Urban Regeneration Externalities
2.2. Estimation of the Impact of Adaptive Reuse Projects on the Housing Market
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Materials
3.2. Methodology
3.2.1. Study Area
3.2.2. Hedonic Pricing Method (HPM)
3.3. Database Configuration
4. Results
4.1. OLS-Based Estimates
- For the surface area variable, the marginal price, with a positive sign, was EUR 1710.07 per m2 of commercial area. This means that the marginal increase of one unit of floor space resulted in an increase of approximately EUR 1710 in the value of the property.
- For the lift variable, the marginal price, with a positive sign, was EUR 6454 due to the presence of a lift inside the building in which the property was located, but it was not significant. This was also confirmed by the relatively low marginal price.
- The year of construction obtained a positive marginal price of EUR 473. This means that newer properties were valued on the market.
- For the variable ‘Property type’, the jump in each level of the time scale obtained a marginal price of EUR 7744.
- For the variable ‘Maintenance status’ the marginal price, with a positive sign, was EUR 19,734 for each point on the ordinal scale (0 to 3).
- The presence of a garage amounted in marginal price terms to EUR 8007.
- For the energy class variable (CLEN), the marginal price was EUR 5211 for each point on the ordinal scale (1 to 7). The sign was the same as expected, and the coefficient was statistically significant (Sign. > 0.05).
- The set of dichotomous variables of the years in which the advertisements were published indicate a decrease in asking prices in recent years compared to 2016 (variable omitted), in line with the general situation in the city of Turin. Focusing on the Aurora district, it is possible to say that the prices were falling in general, though further clarification is required. In fact, the area under consideration can be divided into two very different zones, and the pricing does not differ only by the characteristics of the property. This adaptive reuse project actually spans two neighborhoods, Regio Parco and Aurora, which had very different market values. On the one hand, Regio Parco benefits from a new university campus, while Aurora suffers from the nearby Barriera di Milano’s high level of insecurity; therefore, while the south-eastern part of the area had maintained constant prices, the north-western area had seen the most significant percentage fluctuations. The high degree of insecurity of the nearby Barriera di Milano, as well as the high percentage of empty houses, contributed to price decreases in this sub-zone of the studied area. To this it must be added that the area’s offer is very popular and frequently in need of redevelopment; however, incorporating a dichotomous variable that takes into account this subdivision into sub-areas is difficult because the effects are not easily circumscribed into defined boundaries [70]. To test whether the average prices per square meter were affected by this price variation over time, a Pearson’s linear correlation coefficient [71] between the average price and distance to the transformed city block was calculated. The Pearson’s correlation index confirmed that a significant negative linear relationship existed between the price and distance increase for all the years considered; therefore, it can be assumed that a gravitational effect exists, and that it has increased over the years, as shown by the increasing correlation index over time (Table 4).
- The distance to parks in terms of walking distance seems to have negatively influenced prices; for each additional minute of walking to the park, the price of properties decreased by EUR 3204.46.
- The proximity to a busy road negatively affected the asking prices by EUR 12,766.
- The view of the Dora Riparia River affected positively the asking prices by EUR 23,300.
- The Euclidean distance to the transformed block similarly seems to influence the property prices, with a greater appreciation for flats located in its proximity; for every meter of distance there was an EUR 80 decrease in the value of the offer price.
4.2. Multiplicative Exponential Model
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
1 | Different models were explored to analyze the spatial dependence of the dependent variable (spatial lagged model, SLM) and of the error term (spatial error model, SEM) [72,73,74,75]. The SEM model performed the best in terms of significance of the Lagrange multiplier, with an R2 equal to 0.79; however, the main result concerning the effect of the development area is the same. |
References
- Berger, S.; High, S. (De-)Industrial Heritage. Labor 2019, 16, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berta, M.; Bottero, M.; Bravi, M.; Dell’Anna, F.; Rapari, A. The Regeneration of a Shopping Center Starts from Consumers’ Preferences: A Best-Worst Scaling Application. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 12955, pp. 533–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arbab, P.; Alborzi, G. Toward developing a sustainable regeneration framework for urban industrial heritage. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 12, 263–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickerill, T. Investment Leverage for Adaptive Reuse of Cultural Heritage. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tu, H.M. Sustainable heritage management: Exploring dimensions of pull and push factors. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eom, J.S.; Yoon, S.H.; An, D.W. The sustainability of regenerative cafes utilizing idle industrial facilities in south korea. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owojori, O.M.; Okoro, C.S.; Chileshe, N. Current Status and Emerging Trends on the Adaptive Reuse of Buildings: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamida, M.B.; Jylhä, T.; Remøy, H.; Gruis, V. Circular building adaptability and its determinants—A literature review. Int. J. Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2022, in press. [CrossRef]
- Guo, P.; Li, Q.; Guo, H.; Li, H. Quantifying the core driving force for the sustainable redevelopment of industrial heritage: Implications for urban renewal. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 48097–48111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radziszewska-Zielina, E.; Adamkiewicz, D.; Szewczyk, B.; Kania, O. Decision-Making Support for Housing Projects in Post-Industrial Areas. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bosone, M.; De Toro, P.; Girard, L.F.; Gravagnuolo, A.; Iodice, S. Indicators for Ex-Post Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Adaptive Reuse Impacts in the Perspective of the Circular Economy. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dell’Ovo, M.; Dell’Anna, F.; Simonelli, R.; Sdino, L. Enhancing the Cultural Heritage through Adaptive Reuse. A Multicriteria Approach to Evaluate the Castello Visconteo in Cusago (Italy). Sustainability 2021, 13, 4440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adelaja, S.; Shaw, J.; Beyea, W.; McKeown, J.C. Renewable energy potential on brownfield sites: A case study of Michigan. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 7021–7030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossitti, M.; Oppio, A.; Torrieri, F. The Financial Sustainability of Cultural Heritage Reuse Projects: An Integrated Approach for the Historical Rural Landscape. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Centis, L.; Micelli, E. Regenerating Places outside the Metropolis. A Reading of Three Global Art-Related Processes and Development Trajectories. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trisciuoglio, M.; Barosio, M.; Ricchiardi, A.; Tulumen, Z.; Crapolicchio, M.; Gugliotta, R. Transitional Morphologies and Urban Forms: Generation and Regeneration Processes—An Agenda. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iodice, S.; De Toro, P.; Bosone, M. Circular Economy and adaptive reuse of historical buildings: An analysis of the dynamics between real estate and accommodation facilities in the city of Naples (Italy). Aestimum 2020, 2020, 103–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosen, S. Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition. J. Politi Econ. 1974, 82, 34–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Federazione Italiana Agenti Immobiliari Professionali—Fiaip. A Torino Prezzi Immobili +25% in 2 Anni in Zona Nuvola Lavazza—Fiaip. Available online: https://www.fiaip.it/news/news-territoriali/piemonte/torino/a-torino-prezzi-immobili-25-in-2-anni-in-zona-nuvola-lavazza/ (accessed on 6 June 2022).
- Cerreta, M.; Elefante, A.; La Rocca, L. A Creative Living Lab for the Adaptive Reuse of the Morticelli Church: The SSMOLL Project. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Engwall, M. No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Res. Policy 2003, 32, 789–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottero, M.; Bragaglia, F.; Caruso, N.; Datola, G.; Dell’Anna, F. Experimenting community impact evaluation (CIE) for assessing urban regeneration programmes: The case study of the area 22@ Barcelona. Cities 2020, 99, 102464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Capolongo, S.; Sdino, L.; Dell’Ovo, M.; Moioli, R.; Della Torre, S. How to Assess Urban Regeneration Proposals by Considering Conflicting Values. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dell’Anna, F.; Dell’Ovo, M. A stakeholder-based approach managing conflictual values in urban design processes. The case of an open prison in Barcelona. Land Use Policy 2022, 114, 105934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Everard, M.; Reed, M.S.; Kenter, J.O. The ripple effect: Institutionalising pro-environmental values to shift societal norms and behaviours. Ecosyst. Serv. 2016, 21, 230–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottero, M.; Assumma, V.; Caprioli, C.; Dell’Ovo, M. Decision making in urban development: The application of a hybrid evaluation method for a critical area in the city of Turin (Italy). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 72, 103028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dell’Ovo, M.; Bassani, S.; Stefanina, G.; Oppio, A. Memories at risk. How to support decisions about abandoned industrial heritage regeneration. Valori Valutazioni 2020, 2020, 107–115. [Google Scholar]
- Della Spina, L. Adaptive Sustainable Reuse for Cultural Heritage: A Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding Approach Supporting Urban Development Processes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bottero, M.; Ferretti, V.; Mondini, G. How to Support Strategic Decisions in Territorial Transformation Processes. Int. J. Agric. Environ. Inf. Syst. 2015, 6, 40–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jayantha, W.M.; Yung, E.H.K. Effect of Revitalisation of Historic Buildings on Retail Shop Values in Urban Renewal: An Empirical Analysis. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boscacci, F.; Camagni, R.; Caragliu, A.; Maltese, I.; Mariotti, I. Collective benefits of an urban transformation: Restoring the Navigli in Milan. Cities 2017, 71, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shehata, A.M. Current Trends in Urban Heritage Conservation: Medieval Historic Arab City Centers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torrieri, F.; Fumo, M.; Sarnataro, M.; Ausiello, G. An Integrated Decision Support System for the Sustainable Reuse of the Former Monastery of “Ritiro del Carmine” in Campania Region. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Conejos, S.; Langston, C.; Smith, J. Designing for better building adaptability: A comparison of adaptSTAR and ARP models. Habitat Int. 2014, 41, 85–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becchio, C.; Bottero, M.C.; Corgnati, S.P.; Dell’Anna, F. Evaluating Health Benefits of Urban Energy Retrofitting: An Application for the City of Turin. In Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions; Bisello, A., Vettorato, D., Laconte, P., Costa, S., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 281–304. ISBN 9783319757735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castles, A. Community Initiated Adaptive Reuse for Culture and the Arts: ‘The Tanks Arts Centre’ Cairns, Australia. eTrop. Electron. J. Stud. Trop. 2020, 19, 119–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Napoli, G.; Bottero, M.; Ciulla, G.; Dell’Anna, F.; Figueira, J.R.; Greco, S. Supporting public decision process in buildings energy retrofitting operations: The application of a Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding model to a case study in Southern Italy. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 60, 102214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oppio, A.; Bottero, M. Conflicting values in designing adaptive reuse for cultural heritage. A case study of social multicriteria evaluation. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; Volume 10406, pp. 607–623. [Google Scholar]
- Kee, T.; Chau, K.W. Adaptive reuse of heritage architecture and its external effects on sustainable built environment—Hedonic pricing model and case studies in Hong Kong. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1597–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottero, M.; D’Alpaos, C.; Marello, A. An Application of the A’WOT Analysis for the Management of Cultural Heritage Assets: The Case of the Historical Farmhouses in the Aglié Castle (Turin). Sustainability 2020, 12, 1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oevermann, H.; Degenkolb, J.; Dießler, A.; Karge, S.; Peltz, U. Participation in the reuse of industrial heritage sites: The case of Oberschöneweide, Berlin. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2016, 22, 43–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cizler, J. Urban regeneration effects on industrial heritage and local community—Case study: Leeds, UK. Sociol. Prost. 2012, 50, 223–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Citron, R.S. Urban regeneration of industrial sites: Between heritage preservation and gentrification. Trans. Built Environ. 2021, 203, PI263–PI273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.; Liu, X. Adaptive Reuse of Religious Heritage and Its Impact on House Prices. J. Real Estate Financ. Econ. 2020, 64, 71–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrio, M.; Loureiro, M.L. A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1023–1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, W.C.; Eppink, F.V. Drivers of heritage value: A meta-analysis of monetary valuation studies of cultural heritage. Ecol. Econ. 2016, 130, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bronnmann, J.; Liebelt, V.; Marder, F.; Meya, J.; Quaas, M.F. The Value of Naturalness of Urban Green Spaces: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment; Working Papers 128/20; University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics: Odense, Denmark, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Cao, Y.; Swallow, B.; Qiu, F. Identifying the effects of a land-use policy on willingness to pay for open space using an endogenous switching regression model. Land Use Policy 2021, 102, 105183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, C.U.; Panduro, T.E.; Lundhede, T.H.; von Graevenitz, K.; Thorsen, B.J. Who demands peri-urban nature? A second stage hedonic house price estimation of household’s preference for peri-urban nature. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 207, 104016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barreca, A.; Curto, R.; Malavasi, G.; Rolando, D. Energy Retrofitting for the Modern Heritage Enhancement in Weak Real Estate Markets: The Olivetti Housing Stock in Ivrea. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottero, M.; Caprioli, C.; Foth, M.; Mitchell, P.; Rittenbruch, M.; Santangelo, M. Urban parks, value uplift and green gentrification: An application of the spatial hedonic model in the city of Brisbane. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 74, 127618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dell’Anna, F.; Bottero, M.; Bravi, M. Geographically Weighted Regression Models to Investigate Urban Infrastructures Impacts. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 12955, pp. 599–613. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, S.; Wang, Y.; Ni, Z.; Zhang, X.; Xia, B. Benefits of the ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructures: Differences between perception and measurements. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 54, 126774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dell’Anna, F.; Bravi, M.; Bottero, M. Urban Green infrastructures: How much did they affect property prices in Singapore? Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 68, 127475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.; Hossain, T.; Chowdhury, R.H.; Uddin, M.S. Effects of Transportation Accessibility on Residential Housing Rent: Evidence from Metropolitan City of Khulna, Bangladesh. J. Urban Plan. Dev. 2021, 147, 04021009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berawi, M.A.; Miraj, P.; Saroji, G.; Sari, M. Impact of rail transit station proximity to commercial property prices: Utilizing big data in urban real estate. J. Big Data 2020, 7, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, D.; Jiao, J. How Does Urban Rail Transit Influence Residential Property Values? Evidence from An Emerging Chinese Megacity. Sustainability 2019, 11, 534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Franco, S.F.; Macdonald, J.L. The effects of cultural heritage on residential property values: Evidence from Lisbon, Portugal. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2018, 70, 35–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chin, T.C.; Yan, B.T.; Wai, F.W.; Kong, S.L.; Koh, Y.X. Revealing the investment value of penang heritage properties. Plan. Malays. J. 2021, 19, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iftekhar, S.; Polyakov, M.; Rogers, A. Valuing the improvement of a decommissioned heritage site to a multifunctional water sensitive greenspace. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 313, 114908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leontief, W. Input-Output Economics; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1986; ISBN 0195035275. [Google Scholar]
- Cabodi, C.; Caruso, N.; Mela, S.; Pede, E.; Rossignolo, C.; Saccomanni, S. Sguardi su AURORA: Tra Centro e Periferia; Politecnico di Torino: Turin, Italy, 2020; ISBN 978-88-85745-48-3. [Google Scholar]
- Lavazza, S.P.A. Programma Integrato ai Sensi L.R. n.18 del 1996; Progetto del Nuovo Centro Direzionale Lavazza: Turin, Italy, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Curto, R.; Fregonara, E.; Semeraro, P. Prezzi di Offerta vs. Prezzi di Mercato: Un’analisi empirica. Territorio 2012, 12, 53–72. [Google Scholar]
- Michelangeli, A. l metodo dei prezzi edonici per la costruzione di indici dei prezzi per il mercato immobiliare. In Principi Metodologici per la Costruzione di Indici dei Prezzi nel Mercato; Del Giudice, V., D’Amato, M., Eds.; Maggioli Editore: Dogana, San Marino, 2008; pp. 102–113. [Google Scholar]
- Łaszkiewicz, E.; Heyman, A.; Chen, X.; Cimburova, Z.; Nowell, M.; Barton, D.N. Valuing access to urban greenspace using non-linear distance decay in hedonic property pricing. Ecosyst. Serv. 2021, 53, 101394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhry, P.; Sharma, M.; Bhargava, R. Benefit-cost analysis of lake conservation with emphasis on aesthetics in developing countries. Int. J. Hydrol. Sci. Technol. 2013, 3, 111–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibbons, S.; Mourato, S.; Resende, G.M. The Amenity Value of English Nature: A Hedonic Price Approach. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2014, 57, 175–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- ISTAT (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica) Population Housing Census 2011. Available online: https://www.istat.it/it/censimenti-permanenti/censimenti-precedenti/popolazione-e-abitazioni/popolazione-2011 (accessed on 10 April 2021).
- Osland, L. An Application of Spatial Econometrics in Relation to Hedonic House Price Modeling. J. Real Estate Res. 2010, 32, 289–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearson, K. Note on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1895, 58, 240–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anselin, L. A test for spatial autocorrelation in seemingly unrelated regressions. Econ. Lett. 1988, 28, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anselin, L.; Syabri, I.; Kho, Y. GeoDa: An Introduction to Spatial Data Analysis. Geogr. Anal. 2006, 38, 5–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LeSage, J.; Pace, R.K. Introduction to Spatial Econometrics; Chapman and Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009; ISBN 9780429138089. [Google Scholar]
- Dell’Anna, F. Spatial Econometric Analysis of Multi-family Housing Prices in Turin: The Heterogeneity of Preferences for Energy Efficiency. In ICCSA 2022 Workshops, LNCS 13380; Gervasi, O., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 1–17, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yinger, J. Hedonic Markets and Explicit Demands: Bid-Function Envelopes for Public Services, Neighborhood Amenities, and Commuting Costs; Center for Policy Research: Madrid, Spain, 2012; Volume 52. [Google Scholar]
- Tempesta, T. Benefits and costs of urban parks: A review. Aestimum 2015, 67, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nelson, J.P. Residential choice, hedonic prices, and the demand for urban air quality. J. Urban Econ. 1978, 5, 357–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, A.M. Hedonic Prices, Property Values and Measuring Environmental Benefits: A Survey of the Issues. Scand. J. Econ. 1979, 81, 154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Andrioti, N.; Kanetaki, E.; Drinia, H.; Kanetaki, Z.; Stefanis, A. Identifying the Industrial Cultural Heritage of Athens, Greece, through Digital Applications. Heritage 2021, 4, 3113–3125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Authors | Publication Year | City, State | Goal | Subject of Investigation | Amenities and Location Characteristics | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liu and Liu [44] | 2022 | The Netherlands | Investigating the external effect of reusing religious heritage on surrounding house prices. | Religious heritage | Displacement to heritage (in m); | The authors discover a significant positive externality of religious heritage reusing on local house prices. The external effects vary depending on the size of the project and its monumental status. Larger religious heritage reuse projects, as well as those designated as national monuments, have a greater impact on surrounding house prices. |
Iftekhar et al. [60] | 2022 | Melbourne, Australia | Evaluation of the improvement of a disused historical site into a water-sensitive multifunctional green space. | Disused historical site | If within 50 m of the main road; if within 50 m of reserves; if within 50 m of new project. | The hedonic analysis has revealed that there has been an uplift in the prices of the properties adjacent to the Brooklyn Park project (within 50 m). The increment is about 5.4%. |
Kee and Chau [39] | 2020 | Hong Kong, China | Providing empirical evidence on how heritage conservation fits into the overall sustainable development in Hong Kong by examining the external effects of architectural heritage conservation on their adjacent neighborhood. | Architectural heritage conservation | Sea view; displacement to the nearest MRT station (in m); displacement to heritage (in m); | The hedonic pricing model regression results confirmed that graded heritage architecture in Hong Kong can have a positive external effect on neighboring property prices. |
Jayantha and Kwan Yung [30] | 2018 | Wanchai, China | Investigating the existence of any relationship between revitalization of historic building developments and the value enhancement of nearby retail properties located at the ground floor in the old area of Wanchai in Hong Kong. | Historic building | Distance to the heritage site from the retail shop; distance to the heritage site from the newly built housing scheme. | The findings indicate that the revitalization of historical sites benefits not only the surrounding property owners but also local governments in the area by increasing the value of neighborhood properties. |
Boscacci et al. [31] | 2017 | Milan, Italy | Assessment of the collective benefits for Milan due to the project to restore the Navigli. | Urban transformation | Driving distance in minutes from Piazza Duomo; availability of green spaces in the close proximity; average height of neighborhood buildings/road width; % of quality buildings in the area; subway stop in close proximity; artificial amenities in close proximity; location in a pedestrian area; apartment is located within 500 m from the existing open Navigli; apartment faces the existing open Navigli; apartment faces the Navigli currently flowing underground. | Empirical results confirm the collective net advantage of the urban transformation. |
Variable | Scale | Min | Max | Average | Standard Deviation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Asking price (EUR) a | Cardinal | 16,000 | 700,000 | 122,545.61 | 87,802.05 |
Asking price (EUR/m2) a | Cardinal | 351.30 | 4354.80 | 1467.18 | 671.05 |
Surface area (m2) | Cardinal | 30 | 279 | 81.04 | 32.04 |
Dwelling level | Ordinal | 0 | 10 | 2.66 | 1.72 |
Lift b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.68 | 0.47 |
Construction year | Cardinal | 1820 | 2022 | 1955.63 | 31.41 |
Property type c | Ordinal | 0 | 3 | 1.30 | 0.94 |
Maintenance status d | Ordinal | 0 | 3 | 1.39 | 0.89 |
Car park | Cardinal | 0 | 3 | 0.16 | 0.55 |
EPC e | Ordinal | 0 | 7 | 2.52 | 1.92 |
2016 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.15 | 0.36 |
2017 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.02 | 0.15 |
2018 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.27 | 0.44 |
2019 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
2020 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.18 | 0.38 |
2021 b | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.22 | 0.42 |
Nearest urban park walking distance (minutes) | Cardinal | 10.84 | 19.70 | 16.40 | 1.83 |
50 m from main roads | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.11 | 0.32 |
Dora Riparia Rivers view | Nominal | 0 | 1 | 0.01 | 0.11 |
Euclidian distance from transformed city block (meters) | Cardinal | 13.50 | 740.40 | 340.84 | 182.48 |
Model 1 | Unstandardized Coefficients | t | Sign. | 95.0% Confidence Interval | Collinearity Statistics | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | Standard Error | Lower Limit | Upper Limit | Tolerance | VIF | |||
Intercept | −900,306.815 | 121,683.456 | −7.399 | 0.000 | −1,139,158.909 | −661,454.722 | ||
Surface area | 1710.068 | 50.071 | 34.153 | 0.000 | 1611.784 | 1808.352 | 0.905 | 1.105 |
Lift | 6454.919 | 3813.161 | 1.693 | 0.091 | −1029.924 | 13,939.761 | 0.733 | 1.363 |
Construction year | 473.550 | 64.195 | 7.377 | 0.000 | 347.542 | 599.559 | 0.573 | 1.746 |
Property type | 7744.414 | 1931.092 | 4.010 | 0.000 | 3953.880 | 11,534.949 | 0.706 | 1.416 |
Maintenance status | 19,734.173 | 2117.598 | 9.319 | 0.000 | 15,577.547 | 23,890.799 | 0.659 | 1.517 |
Car park | 8007.000 | 2924.339 | 2.738 | 0.006 | 2266.823 | 13,747.177 | 0.916 | 1.092 |
EPC | 5211.526 | 950.210 | 5.485 | 0.000 | 3346.362 | 7076.690 | 0.703 | 1.423 |
2017 | −24,793.206 | 10,618.531 | −2.335 | 0.020 | −45,636.289 | −3950.123 | 0.874 | 1.144 |
2018 | −22,316.934 | 5024.343 | −4.442 | 0.000 | −32,179.203 | −12,454.666 | 0.468 | 2.137 |
2019 | −17,424.154 | 5657.275 | −3.080 | 0.002 | −28,528.803 | −6319.506 | 0.552 | 1.811 |
2020 | −18,258.760 | 5508.690 | −3.315 | 0.001 | −29,071.752 | −7445.769 | 0.525 | 1.906 |
2021 | −19,674.650 | 5206.456 | −3.779 | 0.000 | −29,894.386 | −9454.914 | 0.496 | 2.015 |
Nearest urban park walking distance | −3204.465 | 876.716 | −3.655 | 0.000 | −4925.368 | −1483.561 | 0.907 | 1.103 |
50 m from main roads | −12,766.758 | 5555.449 | −2.298 | 0.022 | −23,671.532 | −1861.984 | 0.755 | 1.324 |
Dora Riparia Rivers view | 23,300.806 | 13,573.008 | 1.717 | 0.086 | −3341.611 | 49,943.223 | 0.962 | 1.039 |
Euclidian distance from transformed city block | −80.879 | 9.932 | −8.143 | 0.000 | −100.374 | −61.384 | 0.709 | 1.410 |
Year | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Euclidian distance from trans-formed city block (meters) | −0.284 | −0.315 | −0.367 | −0.449 | −0.399 | −0.424 |
Significance | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Model 2 | Coefficient | 95.0% Confidence Interval | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
β | Standard Error | Lower Limit | Upper Limit | |
Intercept | 2.385 × 10−18 | 0.000 | −2.223 × 10−17 | 2.700 × 10−17 |
Surface area | 1.090 | 0.024 | 1.043 | 1.137 |
Lift | 0.076 | 0.036 | 0.006 | 0.145 |
Construction year | 6.473 | 0.699 | 5.100 | 7.846 |
Property type | 0.190 | 0.029 | 0.133 | 0.247 |
Maintenance status | 0.364 | 0.032 | 0.301 | 0.427 |
Car park | 0.096 | 0.021 | 0.055 | 0.138 |
EPC | 0.091 | 0.015 | 0.061 | 0.121 |
2017 | −0.268 | 0.113 | −0.490 | −0.046 |
2018 | −0.204 | 0.038 | −0.279 | −0.130 |
2019 | −0.283 | 0.045 | −0.371 | −0.195 |
2020 | −0.273 | 0.044 | −0.358 | −0.187 |
2021 | −0.224 | 0.043 | −0.308 | −0.139 |
Nearest urban park walking distance | −0.547 | 0.089 | −0.721 | −0.372 |
50 m from main roads | −0.267 | 0.052 | −0.368 | −0.165 |
Dora Riparia River view | 0.453 | 0.106 | 0.244 | 0.662 |
Euclidian distance from transformed city block | −0.094 | 0.015 | −0.123 | −0.065 |
Marginal Price (EUR/m) | Distance from City Block (m) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | Min | 1Q | Median | 3Q | Max | IQR | SD | Mean |
63.50 | 5.44 | 17.37 | 28.16 | 66.14 | 886.48 | 48.77 | 93.39 | 340.84 |
Buffer (m) | Residential Surface (m2) | Apartments (No) | WTP/Household (EUR) | WTP (EUR) |
---|---|---|---|---|
13–50 | 7819 | 95 | 17,120.30 | 1,626,428.50 |
50–100 | 16,200 | 198 | 7885.27 | 1,561,283.46 |
100–200 | 34,400 | 420 | 7316.54 | 3,072,946.80 |
200–400 | 93,138 | 1136 | 6788.82 | 7,712,099.52 |
400–600 | 48,903 | 596 | 3741.89 | 2,230,166.44 |
600–800 | 14,351 | 175 | 2557.26 | 447,520.50 |
Total | 16,650,445.22 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dell’Anna, F. What Advantages Do Adaptive Industrial Heritage Reuse Processes Provide? An Econometric Model for Estimating the Impact on the Surrounding Residential Housing Market. Heritage 2022, 5, 1572-1592. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5030082
Dell’Anna F. What Advantages Do Adaptive Industrial Heritage Reuse Processes Provide? An Econometric Model for Estimating the Impact on the Surrounding Residential Housing Market. Heritage. 2022; 5(3):1572-1592. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5030082
Chicago/Turabian StyleDell’Anna, Federico. 2022. "What Advantages Do Adaptive Industrial Heritage Reuse Processes Provide? An Econometric Model for Estimating the Impact on the Surrounding Residential Housing Market" Heritage 5, no. 3: 1572-1592. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5030082
APA StyleDell’Anna, F. (2022). What Advantages Do Adaptive Industrial Heritage Reuse Processes Provide? An Econometric Model for Estimating the Impact on the Surrounding Residential Housing Market. Heritage, 5(3), 1572-1592. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5030082