Contemporary urban planning for the past decades has concentrated on sustainable development, for instance through the promotion of dense development (Echenique et al., 2012). Important components for sustainable urban development concerns increasing residential and building density, as means of counteracting the consequences of urban sprawl (Jenks and Jones, 2008). Because it is argued that high-residential density is more economically, environmentally and socially sustainable than low-density since a higher concentration of people contributes to for instance shorter transportation distances as well as makes services and amenities more economically viable  (Frey, 1999; Haughton and Hunter, 2004). However, whether the densification of cities has desirable or undesirable social, economic and ecological impacts is highly contested. The purpose of this study is to analyze the socioeconomic outcomes of the urban densification process in the Lundby District, Gothenburg, over time. Through a mixed method approach, statistical information for Lundby District, for the years 2008 to 2015 have been processed and two semi-structured interviews with employees in the City Planning Authority and Lundby District Administration were conducted. The densification in Lundby presents certain strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. As more than 6300 new housing units has been constructed during this time-period, and more is to come in the near future, Lundby experienced a repopulation as the housing construction has facilitate a population increase of more than 11 000 new inhabitants. However, as the favored tenure developed during this time-period been condominiums certain weaknesses exist. Nonetheless, densification and the rapid increase in population has contributed to the number of vehicle per 100 inhabitants decreasing, which presents opportunities for being more environmentally friendly. On the other hand the claim that through densification could diversity and social mixing be achieved is flawed, as seen in Lundby the densification process has brought changes in population structure and socioeconomic characteristics, which suggest some form of gentrification is occurring.

This dissertation examines the relationship between economic resilience, disaster experience, and smart growth policies at the local government level. The study is based upon three research questions that examine spatial distribution of economic resilience in Florida cities, and examines the impact of disaster experience, and smart growth policies adopted by local governments on economic resilience. Based upon the bounce-forward approach (Cowell, 2013; Klein et al. 2003), economic resilience is defined using three dimensions—economic stability, economic equity, and economic diversity. The spatial analysis is conducted by mapping economic resilience scores across 780 Census Designated Places in Florida through standard deviation method of classification, and conducting cluster-outlier analysis. Results suggest difference in economic resilience within coastal and inland communities—with higher scores mostly situated inland. East Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida were identified as high economic resilience clusters, and Northwest Florida was identified as low resilience cluster. Impact of disaster experience, and smart growth policies on economic resilience was examined based upon logic of focusing events by Birkland (1997, 2010). Data was collected from the U.S. Census, the National Climatic Data Center, and the Energy Sustainable Florida Communities Survey conducted by Florida State University in 2009. Results suggest significant association between disaster experience of communities and their level of economic resilience, highlighting the importance of community learning in building capacity for resilience after disasters. The results also highlight the need of balancing mitigation and adaptation strategies. Mixed-use development policies, green building certification, and energy savings policies were found to have a significant positive impact on economic resilience.

No description available.

Low-density residential development patterns in New England have resulted in the excessive loss of farms, forests and other open spaces and increased automobile dependence. Coupled with increasingly high land costs, sprawl has contributed towards an affordable housing crisis in Massachusetts. The need for sustainable development (such as new urbanism and smart growth) has been increasingly recognized, yet efforts have been hampered, in part, due to apathy and local residents’ resistance towards increasing residential densities, resulting in limited choices for willing homebuyers. This study examines perceptions of residential neighborhoods and sustainable development among residents in Hopkinton and Southborough, Massachusetts; two communities with rural and suburban character located in the rapidly growing metropolitan Boston region. A photo-based survey sent through the mail asked respondents to rate scenes of innovative residential settings and to answer questions about their attitudes towards environmental issues, planning approaches and neighborhood preferences, their current residential setting and demographic characteristics. The results from 253 survey respondents showed three important themes: (1) that residents expressed strong environmental values yet many lacked awareness of the environmental impacts of low density housing, (2) strong preference for views of nature and open spaces was prevalent and (3) visual design variables can dramatically influence perceived density. Key findings indicate two sub-groups. Approximately one-third of the respondents strongly support denser, sustainable development alternatives and value neighborhood planning that reduces auto dependency, meets the needs of households with various incomes and protects open space. While, the other two-thirds of the sample favor calm, scenic, low density neighborhoods and would like to see their community preserve its open spaces and maintain its historic and rural aesthetic. The study concludes with recommendations for regionally appropriate approaches to sustainable development that take into account the multiple scales and stakeholder involvement.

The Los Angeles Adaptive Reuse Ordinance (ARO) is an incentive program that encourages building reuse through regulatory exemptions. The ARO was partially intended to reduce vehicle miles travelled by encouraging mixed commercial and residential uses in existing buildings within Downtown Los Angeles and areas poised for redevelopment (Mayor’s Office of Economic Development, 2004, pp. 22, 51). Researchers and planners claim that the ARO helped to reduce vehicle miles travelled (Bell, 2014; Los Angeles Department of City Planning, 2014d; Bullen & Love, 2009; Bernstein, 2012), but these claims are not supported by discussions of the spatial distribution of ARO projects in relation to transit, or if the ARO accelerated, or hindered, infill transit-oriented development projects. This thesis aims to better understand the contributions of the ARO to transit-oriented growth in the City of Los Angeles. Two methods of analysis are used: a spatial analysis examining the number of ARO projects within a half-mile radius of Metro stations, and a statistical analysis examining the number of new buildings constructed in Downtown Los Angeles from 1985 to 2013. The majority of ARO projects (72%) have been developed within a half-mile radius of Metro rail stations. The ARO appears to have accelerated downtown development activity since its adoption in 1999, reversing a lull in development that had been occurring in the area since the late 1980s. Findings suggest that the ARO has helped to accommodate and spur transit-oriented growth while preserving historic resources in the City of Los Angeles.

Transportation is a function that affects nearly all life decisions, but is often not given much thought by the average individual throughout their daily routines. Most of this complacency streams from the mainstream development patterns in the United States that have changed little from the end of World War II. During the immediate post-war years a perfect mix for suburban living came together: the mass production of automobiles, guaranteed mortgages from the federal government through the G.I. Bill, and in 1956 the passage of the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act. These factors, along with the dominate social paradigm that the "American Dream" was to have a personal front and back yard, helped profoundly transform development in the country. Over half a century later, the United States is now experiencing the consequences of this sprawled, auto-dependent development pattern. Energy prices have increased substantially over the past decade, which were only contained momentarily by a worldwide recession that was arguably caused by the same development patterns. Environmental consequences are becoming increasingly evident, ranging from contaminated storm-water runoff, to global climate change. Similarly, mental and physical health has degraded rapidly, with a soaring depression and obesity rates. The United States can, and should do better than this. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) offers a solution to help alleviate many of the complex issues that many communities must address. While there is no perfect template, TOD is an important step forward for the overall quality of life for individuals throughout the nation. This report will look at the steps that have been taken in the Portland Oregon Metropolitan Area to discourage sprawl development, measuring the effects of their actions on environmental, economic and health factors.

No description available.

Assignment (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The greatest challenge for our time is to ensure the preservation of our environment and the well being of our people. With this in mind and the fact that almost half of the world’s population is living in urban areas, it is of the utmost importance to ensure that cities develop in a sustainable manner. Cities are regarded as one of the most magnificent creations of human achievements, but when looking at urban areas around the world it can also be regarded as one of the most problematic achievements. The growth of cities is a natural process and an unstoppable progression of events. Modern cities have a major impact on the environment and to ensure successful reduction of this impact, certain problem areas will have to be identified and addressed without delay in order to be in a position to make any significant change in the long run. Interventions of some sort are needed to make living in cities as well as on the planet as a whole more sustainable. The big question is however, how this can be achieved? One of the possible new interventions is the Smart Growth Concept, which is a form of growth management. Although Smart Growth has been around from the early 70’s, it is still a new concept that has not been explored to its full potential. The concept is well known in America but in most countries around the world, including South Africa, it is still a vague concept, which needs more introductions, convincing and ultimately, implementation. Although this article will focus on the Smart Growth concept as a possible solution to creating sustainable cities, the critics do not all agree with this point of view. Enough evidence is however provided to prove that Smart Growth can make a difference in our daily lives. The main aim of this article is to provide the reader with enough information on the subject of Smart Growth, and address the criticism against the concept of Smart Growth, to be able to see the positive influence that the Smart Growth concept can have on our cities. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die grootste uitdaging van ons tyd is om te verseker dat die ons omgewing beskerm word en die welstand van ons mense bevorder word. Met dit in gedagte en die feit dat ongeveer die helfte van die aarde se bevolking in stedelike areas woonagtig is, is dit van uiterste belang dat stede op ‘n volhoubare manier ontwikkel word. Stede kan as een van die grootste skeppings van die mensdom beskou word, maar as daar gekyk word na stedelike areas rondom die wêreld kan dit ook as een van die problematiese skeppings beskou word. Die groei van stede is natuurlike proses en is onstuitbare sameloop van gebeurlikhede. Moderne stede het groot inpak op die omgewing en om te verseker dat die impak suksesvol beperk word, is daar sekere probleemareas wat geïdentifiseer moet word en wat sonder enige verder vertraging aangespreek moet word, ten einde in ‘n posisie te wees om enige beduidende verandering op die lang duur te maak. Ingryping op een of ander manier is nodig om stede meer bewoonbaar te maak, asook die planeet as ‘n geheel meer volhoubaar te maak. Die groot vraag is egter, hoe om dit te doen? Een van hierdie moontlike ingrypings is die Innoverende Groei (‘Smart Growth’) Konsep, wat ‘n vorm van groeibestuur is. Alhoewel die Innoverende Groei Konsep al sedert die sewentiger jare bestaan, is dit steeds ‘n nuwe konsep wat nog nie tot sy volle potensiaal ontwikkel is nie. Die konsep van Innoverende Groei is bekend in Amerika maar is in die meeste lande rondom die wêreld, insluitend Suid-Afrika, nog steeds ‘n vae konsep wat nog verder bekendstelling en oortuiging vereis en uiteindelik geïmplementeer moet word. Alhoewel hierdie artikel die fokus plaas op die Konsep van Innoverende Groei as moontlike oplossing in die skepping van volhoubare stede, is daar kritici wat nie saamstem met hierdie sienswyse nie. Genoeg bewyse word egter voorgehou om te bewys dat die Konsep van Innoverende Groei ‘n verskil kan maak in ons daaglikse lewe. Die hoof doel van hierdie artikel is om die leser van genoeg inligting te voorsien rondom die Konsep van Innoverende Groei , en om die kritiek teen die konsep aan te spreek, ten einde die leser te oortuig dat die konsep positiewe invloed op die groei van ons stede kan hê.

As many American metropolitan areas spread outward, urban sociologists are interested in the effects of sprawl and in efforts to limit suburban expansion. To rein in urban sprawl, land use measures known as “smart growth initiatives” are gaining popularity. Urban growth boundaries are the particular type of initiative examined in this research. An urban growth boundary delineates where development is encouraged and where it is discouraged or prohibited. My first research question is whether urban growth boundaries contribute to the exclusion of racial minorities. I also explore whether urban growth boundaries affect residential segregation. I study 86 places throughout the U.S.: 43 matched pairs of places (with each pair comprised of a place with an urban growth boundary and a place without a boundary but otherwise similar to its partner). I also consider Atlanta, with no constraints on growth, and Portland, Oregon, a smart growth leader. Census data and residential segregation indexes from 1990 and 2000 for whites, blacks, and Hispanics are analyzed. The analysis consists of comparing change in the number of blacks and Hispanics due to in-migration and population growth in places with and without urban growth boundaries, and examining levels of segregation in them. I find that urban growth boundaries do not reduce blacks’ or Hispanics’ in-migration or population size. Also, the preponderance of the results supports the view that urban growth boundaries are not a cause of racial residential segregation.

My research considers both the challenges to and opportunities for implementing Smart Growth strategies in the City of Guelph’s urban growth centre, with a particular focus on the St. Patrick’s Ward neighbourhood. I follow the development of the downtown secondary plan-making process, spanning the time period from March 2010 to June 2011, which includes public participation by residents in the St. Patrick’s Ward and the city at large. The plan-making process started prior to, and continues after, my chosen timeframe, but the information collected in my case study brings to light the complexity of drafting a secondary plan for implementing Smart Growth strategies; the plan should ideally establish a framework for local interpretation and implementation of Smart Growth – the widely supported intensification and redevelopment strategy. I take the view that while a plan can be written to code and be argued rationally by experts, its effectiveness and ethical validity is a function of public participation in planning decisions that include values-rational anchoring, i.e. critical and ethical reflection on the value of a goal. Although many guiding principles and recommendations in the draft Plan are based on Smart Growth strategies, the physical scale of urban intensification is today very much focused on density numbers under the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The City of Guelph’s draft Downtown Secondary Plan primarily seeks to facilitate high-density, mid- to high-rise condominium and/or office developments. This may in turn lead to increased spatial segregation based on socioeconomic differences. Like in Toronto, Guelph’s Downtown Secondary Plan deregulates zoning by-laws and reduces bureaucratic ‘red tape’ for the high-density development industry through more flexible policies. Potential socioeconomic consequences like displacement of entire populations, services, and jobs from the newly re-valued places are, however, not addressed in the Plan; the policy language and conceptual thinking appears primarily geared toward redevelopment and infill. The overall lesson learned from studying the plan-making process leading up to the City of Guelph’s 1st Draft Downtown Secondary Plan concerns the role of planning in implementing Smart Growth; being a specific form of urban planning, Smart Growth implementation requires facilitation and education of stakeholders who are willing to compromise, but not beyond the point where “smart” is removed from “growth”. Given the overarching responsibility of the government to drive home this message, every stakeholder working for the public interest must collaboratively define, steer, and direct the process and private interests at each and every step along the road. The case of Guelph demonstrates the difficulty of prioritizing such a responsibility. Thus, potential future pressures to push and undermine Smart Growth’s synergistic and public participatory core value must be monitored and controlled with long-term objectives in mind.