12 Green Open Spaces in Shopping Malls

DETERMINING AMENITY VALUES OF
GREEN OPEN SPACES IN SHOPPING MALLS:

Case Study of Ayala Greenbelt Park
(Thesis Paper in Master of Architecture)
Marie Stephanie N. Gilles 1 the developers (whether housing or commercial ventures),

steph.gilles529@gmail.com there is a need to pause and consider the monetary value
of what generally are regarded as non-revenue-generating
amenities offered to the public for free such as parks and
open spaces.
Abstract
Numerous real estate empirical observations on
This paper aims to approximate the amenity values of parks determining property values have been applied to
inside malls and evaluate their sustainability, approaching it housing, where proximity to parks dictates a higher
from the contingent property valuation angle, using hedonic market value for potential homeowners who are willing to
price modeling. Through a case study of restaurants inside malls pay a premium to enjoy this amenity. However, there is
(interviews and mapping inventory), it establishes the hardly any study available on determining amenity values of
correlation between restaurant distances to park amenities. It is these parks inside malls or commercial developments, mainly
argued that the retail shops or restaurants located near the parks because these are dictated by and exclusive to their
have a higher probability of ROI (return on investment) despite respective private developers and would entirely depend
higher rental fees, based on volume of foot traffic generated by on their product branding and established priorities in
this amenity. To validate this assumption, Geographic space planning, classified competitive information that is
Information Systems (ArcGIS) is used as a tool in measuring not made readily available for public consumption.
these observations. Factor analysis among the variables is
performed to determine those that are significant, after which
these are entered into a regression analysis to corroborate initial
assumptions and hypotheses regarding the inverse
proportionality between ROI and zoning/ distance and view to
park, i.e. the nearer the shops are to the park, the higher the ROI.
It is the researchers hope that, having the parks economic
viability and sustainability established, it will encourage urban
planners and mall developers to allocate more generous portions
of green open space, thereby contributing to the general welfare
of its users and ultimately enhancing the sense of place and
communion with nature.
Key Words: Determining amenity values, Green open

space in malls Figure 1. Comparison of Types of Civic Spaces.
Moreover, although these civic spaces to a certain extent

belong to the public realm, these are nevertheless
I. Introduction privately-owned, precluding possibility of fiscal attention
from government in the form of subsidies or tax shields, as
In a consumerist society where practicality and in the case of public parks. Depending on their location,
profitability are regarded as foremost in the scale of whether in a CBD of prime property or in the outskirts of a
priorities and where space allocation for rentable units is city, their values can be extremely high such that a large
usually at a minimum in order to maximize revenue for allocation of space could mean sunk investment or lost
business opportunity for the mall developers, owing to the
1
Marie Stephanie Gilles is currently taking up a diploma course at conversion of use from potential revenue-generating units
University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional to common areas made accessible for the public to enjoy at
Planning after finishing her Master of Architecture degree at no added cost to these users.
College of Architecture of the same university. She took a 3-year
Real estate market value will be the most direct measure of
course in Italy under the Centro Internazionale di Studi on
Classical Architecture and Humanities. She had presented papers the economic value of open space, which is the cash price
in local seminars and conferences abroad. A member of the that a buyer pays a seller in an open and competitive
Philippine Green Building Council and Green Architecture market. In urban or urbanizing regions, where highest and
Advocacy of the Philippines, she incorporates the principles of best use (as determined by the market) has usually been
green architecture into her projects.
50
M UHON: A J our nal of Arc hitec ture, La ndsca pe Archi tec ture a nd the Designed E nvironme nt
University of the Philippines College of Architecture Issue No. 4
DETERMINING AMENITY VALUES OF GREEN OPEN SPACES IN SHOPPING MALLS:
Marie Stephanie N. Gilles
development, as in the case of Makati where Greenbelt

and Glorietta parks are located, or of Quezon City where
SM Sky Garden and TriNoma Roofdeck Garden are found,
the open space value of land should be separated from its
development value. Paradoxically, developing these
spaces into parks (though non-revenue generating) would
lead to an appreciation of their economic value as they
become nodes of social interaction and focal points of
interest.
II. Research Problem

The main research problem hinges on finding out to what
extent parks in shopping malls contribute to the increase Figure 2. A two-dimensional Conceptual Diagram Model of the
in level of patronage of shops and restaurants within Sustainability of Parks in Malls.
proximate distance to the park.
As for the sub-problems, the following questions were IV. Research Methodology
formulated:
In examining the costs of land, development and Research Design: 3 Phases
maintenance of these parks, how do the mall Phase 1: Mapping Inventory / Comparative Analysis
developers get a return of their investment
considering the lost business opportunity for revenue- A handful of initial case studies were done as a
generating units and the fact that these amenities are backgrounder, specifically on the following: (a) Ayala
offered to the public at no added cost? Greenbelt Park in Makati, (b) Glorietta Parks in Ayala
How can the value of the land being occupied by the Center Makati, (c) SM North Sky Garden and (d) Trinoma
park (per square meter) be monetized in terms of: Roof Deck Garden. However, it is the Ayala Greenbelt
capital investment, operations/maintenance expenses, Park which will be the main focus of study, as it has the
cost of improvements, amenity values and eventually, highest percentage allocation of green open space in
return-on-investment (ROI)? relation to the building footprint and the entire property
area.
What is the strength of relationship between the
monthly rental fees of these tenants largely affected
by their proximity to the park, i.e. the closer to the
park, the higher the rental? How do these fees
compare with shops or restaurants located inside the
mall with no views to the park?
How significant is the correlation between level of
patronage or foot traffic and distance to the park?
To what extent does the park act as a node, i.e., is it a
strong magnet for customers, generating volume of
foot traffic for the shops and restaurants located
contiguous to it?
III. Hypothesis
In evaluating the sustainability of these green open spaces
in mall developments, the basic assumption is that the
park acts as a magnet to generate volume of foot traffic
which spills over to the shops and restaurants located
nearest to it, especially those found at the ground floor,
immediately contiguous to the open area. It is
hypothesized that the shops and restaurants nearest the
park are charged a premium rental fee per month.
Nevertheless, despite the higher fees, they are able to
recover their expenditures in a few weeks due to their
strategic location and the volume of foot traffic generated
by these nodes or magnets. Figure 3. Diagram showing Flow of Data Gathering and
Analysis for Phase 1.
51
MUHON: A Journal of Architecture, Landscape Architecture and the Designed Environment
Figure 4. Diagram showing Flow of Data Gathering and Analysis for Phase 2.
After getting primary data both from interviews and
Phase 2: Questionnaire Surveys / Interviews statistical description from the survey questionnaires, the
Data gathering in Phase 2 consisted in questionnaire values were applied to the Hedonic Price Modeling for
surveys from restaurant customers and interviews from regression. In this case, the hedonic application was used
mall managers/ owners of restaurants located near the for determining or at least approximating the economic
Greenbelt park. These constitute the qualitative research value of Greenbelt park.
based on descriptive statistics, while the data analysis was A hedonic model of park-in-mall values was expressed in
mostly quantitative in approach, as measurements of 2 categories, where one is for the tenant and the other is
distance to park and their effects on ROI required statistics for the mall owner, as follows:
regression analysis to quantify the strength of correlation
Park Values for the Tenants
among variables.
PVTenant = f (Dist, RF, VP, FQ, RA, PA); where
Phase 3: Factor Analysis and Regression PV is the amenity value of the park measured in terms of
ROI (Return-on-Investment), which is the variable
A shortlist of restaurants and their rental fees was dependent on the following:
generated, with the volume of customers counted in Dist distance from the center of the park and forms part
relation to their proximity to the park. A computation of of the location-specific characteristics; distance to the
the footprint area of these open spaces in relation to the park as a significant predictor, inversely
total lot and the total commercial development was proportional to the ROI, meaning, the closer the
derived from mapping inventory, the use of CAD and GIS tenant is to the park, the higher the rate of ROI;
software. Based on review of literature, interviews and
actual observation, the variables which have a strong VP Volume of Persons or foot traffic generated by the
bearing (strong predictors) on the amenity value of landscape amenity;
Greenbelt park were determined, after which a correlation FQ Food Quality;
among these variables was established. For the RF Rental Fees per month;
correlational strategy, using the Contingent Property
RA Restaurant Amenities (e.g. wifi, ambience of the
Valuation Method, a formula equation combining the
place, food service); and
variables and their relation to the amenity value was
derived. PA Park Amenities (e.g. size, location, landscaping
features, covered areas, lounging space, lighting,
water features).
52
U n i ve r s i t y o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e s C o l l e g e o f A r c h i t e c t u r e I ssue no. 4
Figure 5. Diagram showing Factor Analysis of Variables and Regression Process for Phase 3.
Thus, the linear equation for the hedonic price modeling is

as follows:
y = + 1x1 + 2x2 + 3x3 + 4x4 + 5x5 + nxn +
This equation is applicable for all the regression models
wherein:
Y = dependent variable
= coefficient of regression
= coefficient of 1st parameter (independent variable 1)
x = independent variable 1
= error term
Figure 6. Diagram showing Correlation of Variables for Park
Value from Tenants Viewpoint.
53
For the financial viability variables, the following location of restaurant (or the park) from where the survey
equations are drawn: was conducted.
Net Income (NI) = Gross Sales (GS) less expenditure
(Exp) V. Summary of Findings / Results
NI = GS Exp
Expenditure (Exp) = Fixed Cost (FC) + Variable Cost A. Phase 1: Geographical and Social
(VC) Considerations
Fixed Cost (FC) = Operations Costs (OC) + The quantitative comparative analysis is based on
Maintenance Costs (MC) footprint area taken from satellite maps. A computation of
Fixed Exp = OC + MC the area utilization is itemized according to the following:
Operations Cost = salaries, utilities (electricity, (1) building footprint area and (2) total open spaces within
telephone, water), rental fees, transportation/ lot (TOSL), which is further broken down into unpaved
delivery costs surface areas (USA) and impervious surface areas (ISA).
Maintenance Cost = repairs and maintenance of Since the impervious surface areas refer to the parking
equipment/ vehicles and building interiors lots, access roads, driveways and circulation areas,
pedestrian walkways, cemented grounds, etc., the
Variable Cost (VC) = Cost of Goods Sold (CGS) + 5% computation of the park or green open spaces was limited
of Gross Sales (GS) to the unpaved surface areas with actual trees and plants
CGS = 35% of gross sales contained in its environs.
Park Values for the Mall Owners
PVMall = ROIMall = (a) > [ (b) + (c)]
Revenues (Rev) of the Mall = [percentage of gross
income of tenants (5% GI) + monthly rental fees
(MRF) + Other Income (OI)]
Revmall = 5% GI + MRF + OI (a)
Capital Outlay (CO) = [cost of land investment (LIn) +
land improvements, i.e., trees, soil, utilities, etc. of the
park (LImp)]/ Time (T)
CO = [LIn + LImp] (b)
T
Expenditure (Exp) = operations (OC) + maintenance
costs (MC)
Exp = OC + MC (c)
The primary data gathered from survey questionnaire
Figure 8. Comparative Chart showing the Allocation of Building
responses and interviews were analyzed using Statistical
Footprint vs. Total Open Space of the 4 Malls.
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and other software used
in statistics such as SAS and STATA to get the appropriate
tests and results based on the data set and objectives. A comparison of the case studies regarding space
allocation of the 4 Malls (Greenbelt Makati, Glorietta, SM
North and TriNoma) shows the biggest ratio of park areas
to total lot area in Greenbelt Makati, at 33-35%. The 3 other
malls allotted a range of 5-7% of green open space in
relation to total lot area. Building footprint ratio to open
space is largest in Glorietta at 83%, hence, the decision to
focus on Greenbelt Park.
The Greenbelt Park has a total of 3.3 hectares, a substantial
area coverage given the total lot area of Ayala Malls at 11
hectares. This allocation of space approximates 30% of the
total lot area of Ayala Greenbelt Development. Compared
Figure 7. Process in Collecting and Analyzing Primary Data. to the building footprint area, the Unpaved Surface Areas
(USA) that constitutes the park is equivalent to 35%, while
Respondents consisted of actual on-site customers of the Impervious Surface Areas (ISA) amounts to about 16%.
Greenbelt 3 restaurants. Through convenient sampling, the As advertised in the malls brochure (courtesy of the
researchers approached the potential respondents already management), the Ayala Greenbelt Malls have average
seated in their respective restaurants of choice. Preference daily shopper traffic of 120,000 persons, a total gross
was for restaurants with more than 60% occupancy. After leasable area of 800,000 sq. ft. and over 600 retail, food and
filling up the forms, the researchers would indicate the entertainment outlets.
54
Figure 9. Map showing location of Greenbelt Park in relation to the Ayala Greenbelt and Glorietta Malls Development. Source:
blog.naver.com
Figure 12. Ratio of Open Space to Building Footprint

Greenbelt Park. Source: Bennitt + Design Group
Figures 10 and 11. These two aerial photos were taken during
the period from 1960 to 1970. The main thoroughfares shown
in these photos are: Ayala Avenue, EDSA, Makati Avenue and
Figures 13 to 16. Greenbelt 3 Restaurants: Caf Havana (G/F
Esperanza Street. All of them show the presence of the
Zone 1), Banana Leaf (2/F Zone 2), Seafood Island (3/F
undeveloped Greenbelt Park, a thick patch of trees and
Zone 3) and Red Mango (3/F, Zone 3). Sources (from
vegetation (a) at bottom right, and (b) at bottom left.
internet): www.tripadvisor.com.sg,
Source: Ayala Center Estate Association
abetterchancefoundation.org.ph, and
www.redmangointernational.com
55
Table 1. Summary of Restaurants with Respondents showing Capacity and Floor Area.
B. Phase 2: Data from Questionnaire / Each respondent was asked to indicate their restaurant of
Interviews choice for the various time slots (9-12 AM, 12-2 PM, 3-5
PM, 6-8 PM, and 9 PM onwards).
Above is a tabulated summary of the restaurants where
There is a strong preference for dining outdoors for
most respondents were obtained from.
breakfast/brunch (122 respondents) and afternoon from
There were 2 types of surveys conducted depending on 3:00 to 5:00 PM (146 respondents, this is with particular
mode of data extraction: (a) on site within Greenbelt reference to cafes fronting the park, where they can also
Complex premises, using the printed questionnaire survey enjoy light snacks and coffee or tea). For dinner and after
form, and the other set, (b) off-site/online where the dinner, the majority expressed preference for either dining
respondents were asked to fill up an electronic survey indoors with a view to the park, or outdoors.
form. From the months of October up to December 2012, a
A total of 4 interviews from the top level executives of
total of 346 responses were gathered from on-site data
Ayala Land and Greenbelt Mall management were
collection. However, after filtering the survey forms
conducted. Interviews were conducted with the VPs,
(removing those that had several blanks or unanswered
managers and the chief architect, which provided insight
items), about 327 were considered valid responses. In
on the history and paradigm shift to alfresco (outdoor)
January 2013, an online survey was conducted, and a total
dining in Makati despite the tropical climate. Among the
of 154 responses were gathered. Eliminating those who left
restaurant managers/supervisors, however, the author
blank more than 3 questions, the valid responses were
managed to interview 11, with 6 that were recorded
narrowed down to 146. All in all, total number of
providing more substantial information. The purpose of
respondents was 492, but 473 valid responses were
the interviews was to obtain data on the economic aspects
retained.
of the restaurants which will be used in the quantitative
analysis relating to ROI, rental rates, peak hours and
percentage occupancy. These will complement the data
obtained from the surveys rating the park amenities and
restaurant features. Some managers were generous
enough to disclose the breakdown of expenditures, i.e.
salaries, operations/maintenance expenses, costs of goods
(food & beverage), common area dues (security, janitorial
services, waste disposal, building costs) as well as the
revenues (gross sales, net income, ROI), which were a
great help for this section of the quantitative analysis.
Based on a series of interviews and actual observations, 4
zoning categories were drawn up. These zones coincide
with what Ayala Management calls prime and super-
prime areas. In principle, according to Greenbelt Mall
manager, all the shops in Greenbelt 3 are prime. These
enjoy the amenity value of the park and they benefit from
the view to the landscaped areas. Those that are at the
ground floor, however, are considered super-prime,
Figure 17. Bar Chart Showing Dining Preferences on Different
Timeslots (On-site Survey). owing to the volume of foot traffic generated with all the
56
ingress/egress points plus the proximity and direct access
to the park. Those located at the second floor may still be
considered part of the super-prime areas since these
benefits from the flow of customers coming from the
elevated walkway connecting Greenbelt to the rest of the
Ayala offices and Landmark/Glorietta Malls all the way to
EDSA MRT. The shops at the 3rd and 4th levels can be
considered prime as these catch the spillover of persons
coming from the cinemas at the 4th level.
For purposes of comparative analysis, we have assigned
the following zoning categories:
Zone Category Description/ Parameters

Ground floor restaurants with indoor/
outdoor seating in Greenbelt 3 that have
Zone 1
direct access to the park and very high
volume of foot traffic
Second floor restaurants with indoor/
outdoor seating in Greenbelt 3 that have a
Zone 2
fairly good view to the park and high
Third and fourth floor restaurants with
indoor/ outdoor seating in Greenbelt 3 that
Zone 3
have some view to the park and moderate
Restaurants that are distant from and do not
have a view to the park (e.g. indoor
Zone 4
restaurants in Greenbelt 1) with moderate
Table 2. Zoning Categories with Specific
Description/Parameters.
From the zoning parameters, a series of tables were drawn
which reflected the following: volume of foot traffic, area
of restaurants, capacity and percentage occupancy, rental
rates, itemized expenditures and ROI. These data were
used as basis for Phase 3 statistical analyses.
In the zoning diagram, both the travel distance and the
straight distance were recorded. However, for purposes of
analysis and regression, straight distance was opted since
it represents the access to view of the park measured until
its center more than direct pedestrian access, where travel
distance is more appropriate.
Figures 19 to 22. Map of Ayala Greenbelt Malls categorized

according to Zones 1 to 4.
C. Phase 3: Factor Analysis & Regression

Phase 3 consists mainly in the quantitative analysis of this
research study, wherein two statistical methods were
Figure 18. A 3D Exploded View of Greenbelt Floor Plans used: (1) the factor analysis and (2) the regression analysis.
Showing Straight Distance from Restaurants to Center of
Greenbelt Park.
57
Factor The objective of the factor analysis is to determine which

variables from among the park and restaurant features are
1 2 3 4 important as deemed by the survey respondents. The
good_food .171 .302 -.106 .625 strong correlation that exists among the variables was
variety .160 .181 .110 .748 determined and these were reduced to 4 dimensions, those
considered most important, starting from Factor 1,
food_presentn .170 .038 .276 .612 descending in importance till the last.
ind_access .395 .108 .312 .405 Factor 1 (physical setup): view_to_park, furn_layout,
view_to_park .470 -.005 .329 .207 privacy, lights, ambience, bright_colors, music_sounds,
furn_layout .559 .148 .196 .252 acoustics, independent access
privacy .650 .317 .091 .096 Factor 2 (restaurant service): friendly_service,
prompt_response, wifi, affordable
lights .731 .199 .207 .182
Factor 3 (restaurant image): smoking_area, storefront,
ambience .486 .385 .154 .141
social_status, size_space
bright_colors .525 .200 .407 .089
Factor 4 (food quality): good_food, variety, food_presentn
music_sounds .485 .305 .330 .209
acoustics .392 .276 .351 .137
The outcome of the Factor Analysis is that of reducing the
friendly_service .319 .564 .058 .255 20 variables of the restaurant features into 4 factors or
prompt_response .186 .800 .048 .242 dimensions, wherein Factor 1 figures as the most
wifi .213 .522 .255 .086 important set of elements a customer is looking for in a
restaurant. View to the park is included in Factor 1.
smoking_area .319 .058 .551 .099
affordable .157 .622 .406 .083 Regression Results: Using Distance as Dependent Variable
storefront .115 .524 .539 .113 (vs. Park and Restaurant Features: 80 Variables)
social_status .326 .234 .676 .125 The objective of regression analysis is to model the
size_space .187 .483 .586 .080 relationship between a dependent variable and one or
more predictor/ independent variables. We used a
stepwise regression procedure to select a subset containing
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring. Rotation Method: only significant predictors.
Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. Rotation converged in 18
iterations. From the actual data tabulation of both on-site and online
surveys, a merged data set consisting of 327 respondents
was used as reference for the regression analysis of 80
Table 3. Rotated Factor Matrix with Varimax/ Kaiser variables using the values obtained from the questionnaire
Normalization. regarding park features and restaurant features.
distance Coefficient Standard T Critical P-value [95% Confidence

Error Value Interval]
pa16 -46.1140 10.8023 -4.2700 0.0000 -67.3669 -24.8610

ra5 194.3065 53.5555 3.6300 0.0000 88.9386 299.6744
ra7 -79.0182 25.8034 -3.0600 0.0020 -129.7851 -28.2513
ra10 -41.2144 12.1296 -3.4000 0.0010 -65.0789 -17.3500
ra30 -24.2699 11.9015 -2.0400 0.0420 -47.6856 -0.8543
ra34 44.3936 14.0312 3.1600 0.0020 16.7878 71.9994
ra36 29.9716 14.4440 2.0800 0.0390 1.5538 58.3894
ra38 -39.6813 13.1010 -3.0300 0.0030 -65.4568 -13.9058
_cons 176.2003 12.9271 13.6300 0.0000 150.7668 201.6338
Table 4. Regression Results with Distance as Dependent Variable vs. Park/ Restaurant Features.
58
After having performed the stepwise procedure, the : When a customer has a high preference
number of variables was reduced to the 8 significant ones, of the view to Greenbelt Park, the distance of the
the codes of which are in the following table: restaurant decreases by 41.2144m relative to Greenbelt
Park, holding all other variables constant.
Regression Results: Using ROI as Dependent Variable (vs.

Variable Definition
Zoning, Rental Fees, Restaurant Capacity)
pa16 High park smoking customer preference
The coefficient of multiple determination measures the
ra5 Low food presentation customer preference percentage variation in ROI that can be explained by the
ra7 Low Independent access to restaurant customer independent variables. From Table 6 below, it can be seen
preference that 94.71% is the while 94.63% is the adjusted . As
ra10 High view to park customer preference said in the previous explanation of the coefficient, it is
ra30 High restaurant wi-fi access customer preference better to interpret the adjusted , and thus, it can be said
that this is the BEST model we have, wherein ALL
ra34 High affordable restaurant customer preference
variables are significant. Meaning, 94.63% of the variation
ra36 High inviting storefront of restaurant customer in ROI can be explained by all of the variables included in
preference the regression equation which are: capacity, rent, zone1,
ra38 High reflective of social class/status of zone2 and zone3.
restaurant customer preference
Table 5. Listing of Extracted Significant Independent Variables
and their Codes.
Even in the regression analysis, it shows that the view to

the park figures as a high preference among the
customers. The interpretation of the relationship between
this variable and distance to the park is interpreted as
follows:
Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean Squares Number of obs = 327

Variation Squares Freedom
F Critical Value = 1149.45000
Model 17929.95 5 3585.98945 p-value = 0.00000
Residual 1001.44 321 3.11975126 R-squared = 0.94710
Adj R-squared = 0.94630
Total 18931.39 326 58.0717404 Root MSE = 1.76630
Table 6. ANOVA Table.
Coefficient Standard T Critical p-value [95% Confidence Interval]

Error Value
capacity 0.01854 0.00369 5.02000 0.00000 0.01128 0.02580
rent -0.00003 0.00000 -30.84000 0.00000 -0.00004 -0.00003
zone1 18.03012 0.36296 49.68000 0.00000 17.31604 18.74421
zone2 11.87875 0.35772 33.21000 0.00000 11.17498 12.58252
zone3 1.58226 0.43933 3.60000 0.00000 0.71793 2.44659
_cons 34.14409 0.27785 122.89000 0.00000 33.59745 34.69072
Table 7. Regression results.
59
investment (ROI). Using equations from hedonic price

modeling, a rule of thumb is established among the
correlated variables in the study of ROI, using volume of
foot traffic, rental fees, zoning, capacity and percentage
occupancy of restaurants vis--vis their proximity to the
amenity (in this case, the park). An incremental pattern is
shown by the regression tables, where increase or decrease
in a certain variable affects the other aspects of the study
by a concrete quantitative factor. Therefore, the
relationship between distance to the park and ROI is a
negative relation, inversely proportional to each other,
since the lower the distance (the nearer to the park), the
higher the rate of return. This strong correlation illustrates
the economic and social sustainability of the Greenbelt
Park from the point of view of the tenants as well as for
the mall owners.
Figure 23. Plot Illustrating ROI vs. Zoning. This research will contribute to mall developers and
designers in their economic feasibility studies prior to
setting up a commercial development and will be a guide
in space allocation of green open spaces within the
premises. As their sustainability (social, environmental
and economic viability) as well as feasibility in space
planning has already been validated by this extensive
study, it will hopefully encourage urban planners and
mall developers to allocate more generous portions of
parks and landscape in the commercial master plan
(whether footprint of the lot or floor area of the entire
building).
It is endeavored that local codes and regulations be
revised to mandate commercial establishments to allot a
higher percentage of unpaved surface areas, from a
staggering 5-10% to a minimum of 10-15% or even higher
of Total Open Spaces within Lot (TOSL) and Total Lot
Area (TLA). Section 803 of the The National Building
Code (PD 1096) could be reviewed and revised to increase
this space allocation and specify them as green open
Figure 24. Plot Illustrating ROI vs. Distance. spaces and permeable surfaces instead of limiting it to the
general classification of Unpaved Surface Areas (USA).
By inspecting the graphs of the plots above, it can be seen This will redound to the general welfare of its users,
that the Zoning and Distance are inversely proportional to increase revenues and ROI for the mall owners, while
the ROI, meaning, the nearer the distance of the restaurant improving the ecological balance of the environment,
or shop to the park, the faster the rate of ROI. working towards increasing the ratio of green spaces per
person and improving air quality as well as enhancing
VI. Conclusion and sense of place.
Recommendations Repercussions of this study could enhance the malling

experience in the Philippines, contributing to upgrading
the lifestyle of shoppers and diners, with a view to greater
The factor analyses show that the physical set-up with the
interaction of customers with the natural environment,
feature of view to the park is a significant variable for the
planting and nurturing the seed towards an earth-friendly
restaurant customers, alongside ambience, inviting
consciousness in families: a blueprint for sustainable
storefront, social class image, furniture layout and bright
patterns and green lifestyles for the future of our planet
colors, among others.
earth.
The regression results corroborate the initial hypothesis
that the nearer the restaurants and shops are to the park,
the higher their zoning classification (Zone 1 highest to
Zone 4 lowest) which translate to higher rental fees. But
due to an expected higher volume of foot traffic and the
attraction of the park, these restaurants with higher rental
fees are able to recover their investment and expenditures
and have a faster rate of return (RR) or return on
60
References
Beatley, Thomas. Native to Nowhere: Sustaining Home
and Community in a Global Age. Washington, DC. Lilburne, G. A Sense of Place: A Christian Theology of
2005. the Land. Nashville. 1989.
Blum, A. The Imaginative Structure of the City. Magno-Ballesteros, Marife. Land Use Planning in Metro
Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queens University. Manila and the Urban Fringe: Implications on the
2003. Land and Real Estate Market. Discussion Paper
Series No. 2000-20. Philippine Institute for
Brander, Luke and Koetse, Mark. The Value of Urban
Development Studies. Makati, June 2000.
Open Space: Meta-Analyses of Contingent Valuation
and Hedonic Pricing Results. Institute for Nelson, Jon. Residential Choice, Hedonic Prices and the
Environmental Studies (IVM), Amsterdam. December Demand for Urban Air Quality. Journal of Urban
2007. Economics. Vol. 5, September 2004.
Burchell and Listokin, "Land, Infrastructure, Housing Newman, Peter and Isabella Jennings. Cities as
Costs and Fiscal Impacts Associated with Growth: Sustainable Ecosystems: Principles and Practices.
The Literature on the Impacts of Sprawl vs. Managed Washington, DC. 2008.
Growth". Working Paper. 1995. Ramos, Grace C. Public Urban Space Utilization and
Calthorpe, P., and W. Fulton. The Regional City. Residential Circumstances: Professional and Non-
Washington, DC. 2001. professional Filipino Migrant Workers in Korea,
Doctoral Thesis Dissertation, Seoul National
Clark, T.N., et al. The City as an Entertainment Machine,
University Graduate School, 2008.
Research in Urban Policy, Volume 9, 117, Elsevier
Ltd. 2003. Siemens. Asian Green Cities Index, 2010.
Diamond and Noonan, Land Use in America. 1996. Silver, Daniel, Clark, Terry Nichols et al. A Theory of
Scenes: The Structure of Social Consumption*. The
Duggal, Niti. Use of GIS in Retail Location Analysis.
University of Chicago, 2007.
VDM Publishing. Ohio. 2008.
Thayer, R. LifePlace: Bioregional Thought and Practice.
Economist Intelligence Unit (sponsored by Siemens).
Berkeley. 2003.
Asian Green Cities Index. 2010.
Tomeldan, Michael V., Greenbelt: Not Just a Mall,
Endicott, Land Conservation Through Public/Private
Architecture Asia, Issue 2, June to August 2003,
Partnerships. 1993.
Journal of the Architects Regional Council Asia
Fausold and Lilieholm. "The Economic Value of Open (ARCASIA). Singapore, 2003.
Space". Working Paper . Lincoln Institute of Land
Waltert, Fabian and Schlpfer, Felix. The Role of
Policy. 1996.
Landscape Amenities in Regional Development: A
Florida, R.. The rise of the creative class. New York: Survey of Migration, Regional Economic and Hedonic
Basic Books/Perseus. 2002. Pricing Studies. Socioeconomic Institute
Groat, Linda and Wang, David. Architectural Research Sozialkonomisches Institut, Working Paper No. 0710.
Methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publishers. Wee, Chow Hou and Pearce, Michael. Patronage
Canada. Feb. 2002. Behavior Toward Shopping Areas: a Proposed Model
Hagen, Derek. Real Estate Prices: City Premiums and Based on Huff's Model of Retail Gravitation.
Neighborhood Effects. Minnesota State University National University of Singapore/ The University of
Moorhead. Undergraduate Economic Review. Vol. 1, Western Ontario, Canada. 1985.
Issue 1, Article 9. 2005. Wu, Wenjie. Spatial Variations in Amenity Values: New
Hillier, Amy, Manual for Working with ArcGIS 10. Evidence from Beijing, China. SERC (Spatial
University of Pennsylvania. 2011. Economics Research Center), Department of
Hussen, Ahmed M., Principles of Environmental Geography. London School of Economics and Political
Economics, 2nd ed., New York, 2004. Science. June 2012.
Huff, David Lynch. Retail Location Theory. Graduate Zukin, Sharon. The Cultures of Cities. Cambridge,
School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Masachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 1995.
1980.
Kong, Fanhua et al. Using GIS and Landscape Metrics in
the Hedonic Price Modeling of the Amenity Value of
Urban Green Space: A Case Study in Jinan City,
China, Landscape and Urban Planning Journal No.
79, pp. 240-252. 2007.
Lang, Jon. Creating Architectural Theory. New York.
1987.
61

12 Green Open Spaces in Shopping Malls

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 Green Open Spaces in Shopping Malls

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 Green Open Spaces in Shopping Malls

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DETERMINING AMENITY VALUES OF

GREEN OPEN SPACES IN SHOPPING MALLS:

Marie Stephanie N. Gilles 1 the developers (whether housing or commercial ventures),

Key Words: Determining amenity values, Green open

Moreover, although these civic spaces to a certain extent

development, as in the case of Makati where Greenbelt

II. Research Problem

Thus, the linear equation for the hedonic price modeling is

Figure 12. Ratio of Open Space to Building Footprint

Zone Category Description/ Parameters

Figures 19 to 22. Map of Ayala Greenbelt Malls categorized

C. Phase 3: Factor Analysis & Regression

Factor The objective of the factor analysis is to determine which

distance Coefficient Standard T Critical P-value [95% Confidence

pa16 -46.1140 10.8023 -4.2700 0.0000 -67.3669 -24.8610

Regression Results: Using ROI as Dependent Variable (vs.

Even in the regression analysis, it shows that the view to

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean Squares Number of obs = 327

Table 6. ANOVA Table.

Coefficient Standard T Critical p-value [95% Confidence Interval]

Table 7. Regression results.

investment (ROI). Using equations from hedonic price

Recommendations Repercussions of this study could enhance the malling

You might also like