Low Impact Developments (LID) are an untraditional form of land development which face skepticism due to lack of knowledge of the costs, implementation, and long term effectiveness. LIDs have shown to produce environmental benefits through reduction in sprawl, management of stormwater runoff, and cluster development. This study compares the infrastructure costs and sale price data of an LID to 3 traditional developments along the coastal zone of South Carolina. Infrastructure costs were compiled from developers, engineers, and contractors to determine the cost per lot of each development. Sale price data was recorded from the MLS and county records for a mean price/ft 2 for each development. The study found LID infrastructure costs were 34% higher than the mean traditional development. However, the LID has the 2nd highest price/ft2, the sale price retained its value better, and it has less opportunity costs than the traditional developments. The higher infrastructure costs might be a result of infill development, higher planning costs, and the addition of LID to traditional infrastructure. Higher sale price data shows LIDs have competitive profit potential providing guidance and motivation for developers while mitigating suburban sprawl and the accompanying negative environmental impacts.
","abstract_html":"<p>Low Impact Developments (LID) are an untraditional form of land development which face skepticism due to lack of knowledge of the costs, implementation, and long term effectiveness. LIDs have shown to produce environmental benefits through reduction in sprawl, management of stormwater runoff, and cluster development. This study compares the infrastructure costs and sale price data of an LID to 3 traditional developments along the coastal zone of South Carolina. Infrastructure costs were compiled from developers, engineers, and contractors to determine the cost per lot of each development. Sale price data was recorded from the MLS and county records for a mean price/ft 2 for each development. The study found LID infrastructure costs were 34% higher than the mean traditional development. However, the LID has the 2nd highest price/ft2, the sale price retained its value better, and it has less opportunity costs than the traditional developments. The higher infrastructure costs might be a result of infill development, higher planning costs, and the addition of LID to traditional infrastructure. Higher sale price data shows LIDs have competitive profit potential providing guidance and motivation for developers while mitigating suburban sprawl and the accompanying negative environmental impacts.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Tupper, Joel A."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"M.E.E.R.M.","degree_level":"Campus Access Thesis","degree_discipline":"Earth and Ocean Sciences","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dwayne Porter"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2012,"date_issued":"2012-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2012-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:38:14Z","subjects":["Earth Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Cost","Infrastructure Costs","Low Impact Development","Sale Price","Stormwater Management","Traditional"],"languages":[],"rights":["© 2012, Joel A. Tupper"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/908","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dwayne Porter"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Tupper, Joel A."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Earth and Ocean Sciences"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Campus Access Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.E.E.R.M."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Earth Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Cost","Infrastructure Costs","Low Impact Development","Sale Price","Stormwater Management","Traditional"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© 2012, Joel A. Tupper"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/908"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Low Impact Developments (LID) are an untraditional form of land development which face skepticism due to lack of knowledge of the costs, implementation, and long term effectiveness. LIDs have shown to produce environmental benefits through reduction in sprawl, management of stormwater runoff, and cluster development. This study compares the infrastructure costs and sale price data of an LID to 3 traditional developments along the coastal zone of South Carolina. Infrastructure costs were compiled from developers, engineers, and contractors to determine the cost per lot of each development. Sale price data was recorded from the MLS and county records for a mean price/ft 2 for each development. The study found LID infrastructure costs were 34% higher than the mean traditional development. However, the LID has the 2nd highest price/ft2, the sale price retained its value better, and it has less opportunity costs than the traditional developments. The higher infrastructure costs might be a result of infill development, higher planning costs, and the addition of LID to traditional infrastructure. Higher sale price data shows LIDs have competitive profit potential providing guidance and motivation for developers while mitigating suburban sprawl and the accompanying negative environmental impacts.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A Cost Comparison of a Low Impact Development to traditional Residential Development along the South Carolina Coast"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dwayne Porter"],"dc:creator":["Tupper, Joel A."],"dc:description.abstract":["Low Impact Developments (LID) are an untraditional form of land development which face skepticism due to lack of knowledge of the costs, implementation, and long term effectiveness. LIDs have shown to produce environmental benefits through reduction in sprawl, management of stormwater runoff, and cluster development. This study compares the infrastructure costs and sale price data of an LID to 3 traditional developments along the coastal zone of South Carolina. Infrastructure costs were compiled from developers, engineers, and contractors to determine the cost per lot of each development. Sale price data was recorded from the MLS and county records for a mean price/ft 2 for each development. The study found LID infrastructure costs were 34% higher than the mean traditional development. However, the LID has the 2nd highest price/ft2, the sale price retained its value better, and it has less opportunity costs than the traditional developments. The higher infrastructure costs might be a result of infill development, higher planning costs, and the addition of LID to traditional infrastructure. Higher sale price data shows LIDs have competitive profit potential providing guidance and motivation for developers while mitigating suburban sprawl and the accompanying negative environmental impacts.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/908"],"dc:rights":["© 2012, Joel A. Tupper"],"dc:subject":["Earth Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Cost","Infrastructure Costs","Low Impact Development","Sale Price","Stormwater Management","Traditional"],"dc:title":["A Cost Comparison of a Low Impact Development to traditional Residential Development along the South Carolina Coast"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Earth and Ocean Sciences"],"thesis:degree_level":["Campus Access Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.E.E.R.M."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:38:14Z"}