1# RECORD 0a56ff9c5aeeb80c811f28d082785dd37d837fcc2# TITLE: Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills3# YEAR: 2000.0 VENUE: nan DOI: 10.15760/etd.66404# AUTHORS: O. G. Uba5# PAGES: 133 CANDIDATE TABLE PAGES (1-based): [98]6# ABSTRACT: An abstract of the dissertation of Okwuchukwu Gerald Uba for the Doctor of Philosophy in Urban Studies presented November 5, 1993. Title: Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills The decline in property value can be due to owner's act or exogenous act from the operation of landfills. Landfill neighbors, especially home owners, perceive landfill operation to pose environmental safety problem such as ground water contamination and methane gas leakage that could affect home value. Owners of landfills, especially those landfills that accept only dry waste (limited purpose landfill), claim that since their facilities meet the requirements of environmental regulations and the type of waste they accept could not possibly produce methane gas and leachate there is no property value impact of their facilities. Several studies have shown that landfills do not have impact on property value. However, one recent study found that a large regional landfill have impact on property value. The property value impact of a limited purpose landfill located in Portland, Oregon, was investigated in this study. Data were gathered for homes in approximately one half mile radius around the landfill for the periods before the landfill opened, during operation, and after closure. Hedonic estimation technique incorporated in a multiple linear regression was used to control for a key variable (proximity or distance between the landfill and homes) and examine the relationship of this variable and sale price of homes. The results show that distance of homes (the proxy for perception) from the landfill was positively related and statistically significant with sale prices of homes during the period the landfill was in operation. Distance of homes sold in the periods the landfill was not in existence or operation was not positively related nor statistically significant with sale prices. That is, the operational effects of the landfill was capitalized into property value. With this result, the issue of whether neighbors of landfills should be compensated deserve more attention. The results of this study would be very helpful in negotiating compensation. The results also show that if adequate pollution mitigation measures are in place landfill zoning ordinance should be based on the fact that landfill sites would yield maximum economic benefit to the owner after closure.789===== PAGE 1 (score 4, numeric-paren 0, table-words 0, var-words 4) =====1011Portland State University 12Portland State University 13PDXScholar 14PDXScholar 15Dissertations and Theses 16Dissertations and Theses 1711-5-1993 18Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills 19Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills 20Okwuchukwu Gerald Uba 21Portland State University 22Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds 23 Part of the Public Administration Commons, Public Policy Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and 24the Urban Studies and Planning Commons 25Let us know how access to this document benefits you. 26Recommended Citation 27Recommended Citation 28Uba, Okwuchukwu Gerald, "Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills" (1993). Dissertations and 29Theses. Paper 4751. 30https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.6640 31This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations 32and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more 33accessible: pdxscholar@pdx.edu. 343536===== PAGE 98 (score 48, numeric-paren 28, table-words 3, var-words 7) =====3738TABLE XI39REGRESSION RESULTS FOR THE THREE PERIODS 40Parameter Estimates and Analysis of Variance41Dependent Variable = Sale 42Price43Independent Variables44197145(Before)46197947(During)48198649(After)50Intercept51- 100745216453531656854(-1.270)55(2.207)56(2.167)57Distance58200.287459675.860560- 165.057261(0.871)62(2.323)63(- 0.606)64Lot Size650.5924660.8929670.275268(1.654)69(1.814)70(0.572)71House Size725.90607314.64197416.243275(2.783)76(3.709)77(4.040)78Age79- 136.873080-2 8 1 .8 3 4 381- 150.071882(-3.317)83(-5.134)84(- 3.298)85Bedroom86888.942487- 2906.626988620.969689(1.145)90(-2.071)91(0.495)92Bathroom937131.2993943454.0527954395.006296(5.226)97(1.541)98(2.262)99Height1008029.994910112426102- 5098.5247103(0.991)104(2.010)105(- 0.752)106Basement107164.11521084770.99801094885.4162110(0.137)111(2.616)112(3.050)113Fireplace114*1151091.59751161053.9359117*118(0.561)119(0.597)120Garage1211179.43041222484.63451237811.6183124(1.272)125(1.224)126(4.205)127DF - Regression12891291013010131Sum of Squares - Regression1325472417109.51338398080507.41347952932898.9135Mean Square - Regression136608046345.5137839808050.74138795293289.89139F-ratio14036.75414118.21214221.042143P1440.00011450.00011460.0001147N148561497915076151R-Square1520.87791530.72811540.7640155Adjusted R-Square1560.85401570.68821580.7277159* t-value in parenthesis160* * No fireplace in homes sold in 197116187162163164===== PAGE 99 (score 16, numeric-paren 0, table-words 4, var-words 8) =====165166However, distance coefficient turned out to be negatively associated 167with sale prices. That is to say, there is no evidence that property value 168rose with distance. The distance coefficient was not significant at 0.05 169percent level of two-tailed test. In this instance, the hypothesis that the 170property value impact of a landfill diminishes with distance from the landfill 171is not supported by statistical results of this study.172All the independent variables in the 1971 model had the expected 173signs. Among the independent variables, house size, age and bathroom 174relate positively with sale price, whereas height and basement turned out 175to be negatively associated with sale prices. Bathroom was statistically 176significant at the 0.05 level, and house size and age were significantly at 177the 0.10 level.178The correlation analysis show that lot size, bedroom, and height are 179correlated with sale price at 0.05 significant level. Basement and garage 180are not correlated with sale prices nor with any other variable. The 181correlation analysis show also that lot size, bedroom and height were highly 182correlated with house size and therefore added no new information to the 183equation.184The same independent variables including fireplace were regressed 185against sale prices of homes sold in 1979. The regression results show 186that the adjusted coefficient of determination (R2) is 0.6882 with an F-ratio 187of 18.21. This result show that all the independent variables jointly18888189