2013
Land Use: A Powerful
Determinant of
Sustainable & Healthy
Communities
AUTHORS: *Llael Cox, +Verle Hansen, +James Andrews,
tJohn Thomas, * 1 ngrid Heilke, *Nick Flanders, +Claudia
Walters +Scott A. Jacobs, +Yongping Yuan, +Anthony
Zimmer, +James Weaver, tRebecca Daniels, +Tanya Moore,
**Tina Yuen, +Devon C. Payne-Sturges, +Melissa W.
McCullough, +Brenda Rashleigh, +Marilyn TenBrink, and
tBarbara T. Walton
AUTHOR AFFILIATIONS: *Oak Ridge Institute for Science
and Education Research Laboratory; +Office of Research
and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency;
tOffice of Sustainable Communities, US Environmental
Protection Agency; **Association of Schools of Public
Health Fellow
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge Kathryn Saterson, Bob McKane, Jane Gallagher, Joseph Fiksel,
Gary Foley, Sally Darney, Melissa Kramer, Betsy Smith, Andrew Geller, Bill Russo, Susan
Forbes, Laura Jackson, Iris Goodman, Michael Slimak, Alisha Goldstein, Laura Bachle, Jeff
Yang, and Gregg Furie for helpful contributions.
Project Coordinator's Note
I want to recognize the quality of effort extended by the authors. Ordinarily, one might despair of the
prospects of success when 19 individuals from 9 separate organizational units are asked to address a diffuse
body of knowledge such as "Land Use."
In this report, the reader will find the remarkable result of an extraordinary effort by a dedicated
interdisciplinary group of EPA scientists who distilled useful principles and guidance from a vast and scattered
literature. Future investigators will have the benefit of access to a searchable database of over 1400
references created by the authors.
It was an enriching experience to work with this group and find within it a meaningful summary of the state of
the science. Barbara Walton, Project and Task Lead, September 30, 2013
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
Table of Contents
September 2013
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS II
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS VI
LIST OF TABLES VII
LIST OF FIGURES VII
LIST OF BOXES VII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IX
1 INTRODUCTION: THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
SUSTAINABILITY, AND LAND USE 1
1.1 Scope and Structure of the Land Use Report 3
1.2 Land Use and Sustainability: A critical link 5
2 LINKAGES: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, FEDERAL REGULATION, AND LAND
USE PLANNING 8
2.1 Drivers of Land Use Decisions and Change 10
3 LITERATURE REVIEW: IMPACTS OF LAND USE ON ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMY,
HUMAN WELL BEING 23
3.1 Impacts of Population Change on Land Use 23
3.1.1 Urbanization 23
3.1.2 Sprawl 28
3.1.3 Shrinking towns and cities 39
3.2 Influence of Land Use Form and Development on Sustainability 43
3.2.1 Density 43
3.2.2 Mixed-uses 49
3.2.3 Transit-oriented development 52
3.2.4 Walkability 53
3.2.5 Urban parks and greenspace 56
3.2.6 Regional accessibility 70
3.2.7 Compact development pattern 73
3.3 Impacts of Land Use Types on Sustainability 78
3.3.1 Residential 78
3.3.2 Commercial 83
3.3.3 Industrial 85
3.3.4 Agriculture 88
3.3.5 Parkland and Open Space 92
iii
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
3.3.6 Roads 96
4 RELEVANT METRICS, INDICATORS, AND INDICES OF SUSTAINABILITY 102
4.1 Metricsof development form and pattern 102
4.1.1 Measuring sprawl and compactness 102
4.1.2 Metricsof urban form 104
4.2 Indices of Sustainable Development 106
5 LAND USE PATTERNS SHOW CAUSAL RELATIONS TO ECONOMIC, HEALTH, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 109
5.1 What neighborhood scale land use qualities are most important for advancing sustainability? 109
5.1.1 Active transportation, physical activity, health, and social well-being Ill
5.1.2 Climate change and extreme heat events 112
5.1.3 Environmental Justice and Neighborhood Urban Form 113
5.2 What regional land use qualities are most important for advancing sustainability? 115
5.2.1 Regional coordination to avoid unintended consequences 115
5.2.2 Compact Development Pattern 116
5.2.3 Accessibility and Affordability 119
5.2.4 Minimizing costs and maximizing vitality 120
6 DECISION SCIENCE AND LAND USE PRACTICES 120
6.1 What practices best support these land use qualities? 120
6.2 ORD Recent and Planned Products Relevant to Land Use Decisions and Sustainability 125
6.2.1 Quantification of Ecosystem Goods and Services, Human Health Impacts, and Identification of
Thresholds and Tipping points 127
6.2.2 Defining, Measuring and Tracking 129
6.2.3 Comparing Alternative Scenarios 132
6.2.4 Collaborative Decision-Making 134
7 RESEARCH NEEDS TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY LAND USE SUSTAINABILITY 135
8 LINKAGES FOR LAND USE ACROSS FEDERAL AGENCIES 142
9 CONCLUSIONS 144
10 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EPA/ORD SCIENCE TO ADVANCE LAND USE
PRACTICES FOR SUSTAINABILITY 147
APPENDIX A FEDERAL AUTHORITIES RELEVANT TO LAND USE A-l
APPENDIX B TOOLS TO SUPPORT DECISION MAKING B-l
APPENDIX C ORD TASKS LISTED IN THIS DOCUMENT C-l
iv
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
APPENDIX D WORKS CITED D-l
APPENDIX E JOURNALS CITED E-l
APPENDIX F RESOURCES CONSULTED F-l
v
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
List of Abbreviations
September 2013
ADD
Attention deficit disorder
BMI
Body mass index
BMP
Best Management Practice
CAFO
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation
C02
Carbon dioxide
CBD
Central Business District
DPSIR
Drivers -pressure-state-impact-response framework
EPA
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
EQI
Environmental Quality Index
ERS
Economic Research Service
GHG
Greenhouse gas emissions
GIS
Geographic information systems
HIA
Health impact assessment
IOAA
Immediate Office of the Assistant Administrator
IUWM
Integrated urban water management
LID
Low impact development
NCEA
National Center for Environmental Assessment
NCER
National Center for Environmental Research
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
NERL
National Exposure Research Laboratory
NHEERL
National Health and Environmental Effects Laboratory
NRMRL
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
ORD
Office of Research and Development
ORISE
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
SES
Socio-Economic Status
SHC
Sustainable and Healthy Communities
TRI
Toxics release inventory
U.K.
United Kingdom
U.S.
United States
VMT
Vehicle miles traveled
vi
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
List of Tables
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Table 1 Two centuries of evolving U.S. Environmental Policy (Fiksel et al, 2011) 2
Table 2 Neighborhood land use qualities and positively associated outcomes 110
Table 3 Regional land use qualities and positively associated outcomes 115
Table 4 ORD Products and Research Needs 145
List of Figures
Figure 1 Schematic of the Triple Value Model 6
Figure 3 Schematic depicting obesity, an important community issue that involves all four
sectors of the SHC to address 8
Figure 2 Schematic of Main Topics 7
Figure 4 Land Use DPSIR 14
Figure 6 State Planning Statutes (American Planning Association, 1999) 17
Figure 8 NJ State Development Plan (New Jersey State Planning Commission, 2001) 18
Figure 7 State Role in Local Planning (American Planning Association, 1999) 18
Figure 9 PlanMaryland (Maryland Department of Planning, 2011) 19
Figure 10 Sacramento Blueprint (Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2007) 20
Figure 11 Popularity of Plan Elements (APA, 1999) 21
Figure 12 Change in Land consumption per capita in metropolitan areas, 1990-2000.
Source: McDonald et al 2010 29
Figure 13 Central Park, Manhattan, NYC 56
Figure 14 Conceptual framework capturing the human well-being effects of increased
access to parks and green spaces. Dashed lines represent potential mediators 68
List of Boxes
Box 1 Mission of the EPA
Box 2 Sustainable Development
Box 3 Sustainability is our true north
Box 4 Urban and Coastal Populations
Box 5 Population Growth
Box 6 Kunstler on Sprawl
Box 7 EnviroAtlas
Box 8 Radeloff on land use policies
Box 9 Semiannual report on residential construction trends
Box 10 Envision Integrated Modeling Platform
Box 11 The Integrated Climate and Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS)
vii
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Box 12 The Report on the Environment
Box 13 Maximizing the Utility of Vacant Land (MURL)
Box 14 Tampa Bay Ecosystem Services Demonstration Project
Box 15 Site-Based Stormwater Calculator
Box 16 i-Tree Urban Forest Assessment Applications
Box 17 Disproportionate Health Risks
Box 18 Industrial Ecosystem Toolkit
Box 19 Policy and management tools for reducing nutrients
Box 20 Ecosystem Services in Laurentian Great Lakes
Box 21 Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM)
Box 22 Common sustainability metrics
Box 23 Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Environment, Economy, and Society
Box 24 The Community-Focused Exposure and Risk Screening Tool
Box 25 Green Communities Program
viii
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
September 2013
Land Use: A Powerful Determinant of Sustainable & Healthy Communities
• "Land Use: A Powerful Determinant of Sustainable and Healthy Communities" is
a report prepared by the 2013 Land Use Team to fulfill the 2013 SHC Product
4.1.2 described as "A synthesis of current practices for land use decisions in the
built and natural environments, including current tools, trends, and research
based on the peer-reviewed literature."
• A bibliography of >1400 peer-reviewed publications on land use was compiled,
read and evaluated by the SHC 4.1.2 Land Use Team. These resources were
entered in a searchable electronic EndNoteWeb© Land Use library that is
currently available to EPA employees at no charge under an EPA license with
Reuters.
• Land use has figured prominently in the history of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and in the history of environmental protection in the
United States. Today, municipal governments are the most influential arbiters of
land use. Local polices and ordinances remain one of the most effective means to
protect and restore natural ecosystems and undeveloped land.
• EPA's role as a leader in sustainability has evolved over the decades, continually
reshaped through federal policies and priorities, standard setting, official
guidance, and direct technical assistance to communities. EPA scientists and
engineers have contributed to the published literature in the rapidly maturing
discipline of sustainability.
• From a systems perspective, land is critically important as the source of natural
capital that supplies materials (biomass, fuels, food, and water) and ecological
services to the economic and public sectors of communities.
• An analysis of megatrends for population growth, economic development, and
potential impacts on public health and the environment implicate land use as a
principle factor in achieving a balance between sometimes competing demands
for economic development versus protection of public health and the
environment.
Megatrends in Land Use
• An analysis of megatrends for population growth, economic development, and
potential impacts on public health and the environment, implicate land use as a
principle factor in achieving a balance between sometimes competing demands
for economic development versus protection of public health and the
environment.
• From a systems perspective, land is critically important as the source of natural
capital that supplies materials (biomass, fuels, food, and water) and ecological
services to the economic and public sectors of communities.
ix
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• EPA's role as a leader in sustainability has evolved over the decades, continually
reshaped through federal policies and priorities, standard setting, official
guidance, and direct technical assistance to communities. EPA scientists and
engineers have contributed to the published literature in the rapidly maturing
discipline of sustainability.
• Urban sprawl, emerged during a period of rapid economic expansion and
population explosion following World War II and remains the predominant form
of growth in metropolitan areas.
• "Suburbia" appeared as a new landscape pattern co-incident with a major
demographic shift of more affluent, professional workers and their families
moved away from urban neighborhoods. Remaining properties lost and a
downward sociological spiral took hold that caused many cities to spawn a
phenomenon of inner city decay known, at its worst, as "urban blight."
• Land conversion in the United States is expected to increase the percent of
developed urban land from 3.1% to 8.1% by 2050, consuming a significant
amount of forest and cropland. Researchers have estimated that 18.8 million
acres of land would be used to build 26.5 million new housing units as well as
26.5 billion square feet of new nonresidential space.
Influence of Land Use and Development Form on Sustainability and
communities of the future
• Population loss, or shrinking towns and cities, is a longstanding concern in rural
communities-nearly half of today's non-metropolitan counties lost population
through net out migration over the past 20 years.
• Communities with declining populations, or "shrinking towns," face a contracting
economy characterized by problems of unemployment and poverty, increasing
demands for social services with fewer dollars to pay for them, an aging
workforce, vacant properties, and a loss of historic structures.
• Attempts to compete with other jurisdictions for large economic development
projects, such as new manufacturing plant, office parks, or regional big box
retailers, may come at the expense of local businesses and the communities they
aim to support.
• Moderately high population density is widely promoted by planners and smart
growth advocates for its putative benefits, which include a smaller footprint of
developed land, preservation of agricultural land and open space, less driving,
more walking, support for transit systems, and greater opportunity for social
interaction. Evidence supports many of these benefits.
• As urban residents travel to exurban areas for outdoor recreation, the demands
placed on forest ecosystems in close proximity to growing urban centers pose
challenges for natural resource managers. Another concern is that of human
x
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
safety when the public is brought in contact with wild life (bears, black bears,
wolves, foxes, coyotes) poisonous plants and other hazards of the outdoors.
• Urbanization tendencies can be detrimental to wellbeing of lower income groups.
"Gentrification," the transformation of urban neighborhoods towards higher
incomes and more expensive housing can marginalize lower income people.
• The American Planning Association (APA )recently reported findings of
community priorities indicating job creation (70%) was at the top of the list,
closely followed by safety (69%), schools (67%), protecting neighborhoods (64%),
and water quality (62%). Bikeways (19%), walking trails (18%), and sprawl (16%)
were often mentioned as high priorities.
• When asked to envision high priorities their ideal community, the most
commonly cited elements were locally owned businesses nearby (55%),ability to
stay in the same neighborhood while aging (54%), the availability of sidewalks
(53%), energy-efficient homes (52%), transit (50%), and neighborhood parks
(49%).
• Land use policies the permit development beyond the extent of water and sewer
infrastructure increase the number of households that must rely on well water
and septic systems. Increased use of septic systems raises the risk of sewage
backflow and seepage into water delivery systems, increasing the opportunity for
contamination of drinking water supplies that may undetected for long periods.
• Communities seeking to preserve agricultural land, whether for economic
livelihoods, food security, or to maintain a rural aesthetic, have several options to
manage land use. These include zoning policies, conservation measures, transfer
of development rights, and use of compact development forms
Linkages: Environmental Protection, Federal Regulation, and Land Use Planning
• The Department of Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both have
major jurisdiction and responsibility for land use and preservation of natural
resources
• The EPA has limited authority over private and public land use decisions; however,
both regulatory and non-regulatory policies and practices of the EPA can have
considerable impact on public health, natural resource management,
environmental protection, and economic activity. EPA's implementation of
federal regulation for pollution control and prevention can all be of consequence
for land management and land use practices. Thus, both legislative and non-
legislative activities of the EPA can influence community decisions on land use.
• EPA collaboration with communities can help assure that environmental science
and know how are marshaled to provide tools that communities can use to better
inform their land use decisions. An additional consideration is that unless land use
is afforded attention relative to its importance in shaping ecological and public
xi
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
health, then many of the EPA goals for sustainability require downward revision
or may simply become unachievable
• Urban sprawl has been identified as one of the most significant pressures leading
to deforestation, loss of native habitats, reductions in the numbers and kinds of
species—both flora and fauna—as well as loss of biodiversity in general.
• As populations, transportation networks, and appetites for affluence increase, the
demand for land and the natural capital that it provides are subject to market
forces of supply and demand. As land supply diminishes and demand increasse,
the price of land will increase.
Megatrends in urban development
• Academic studies indicate that community priorities tend to be job creation (70%),
followed closely by safety (69%), schools (67%), protecting neighborhoods (64%),
and water quality (62%). Other priorities are bikeways (19%), walking trails (18%),
and sprawl (16%.)
• "Suburbia" emerged as a new landscape pattern co-incident with a major
demographic shift of the more affluent, professional workers and their families
away from urban neighborhoods. Although sprawl was spawned during a period
of exuberant economic expansion and population explosion following World War
II, sprawl remains the predominant form of urban growth in major metropolitan
areas today.
• Sprawl is not restricted to urban development; rural communities can also display
both sprawling and compact development forms. Rural residents can just as easily
be affected by the negative health impacts of an automobile-dependent
development patterns.
• Another notable trend in U.S. populations is that 80 percent of the current US
population lives in cities—this percentage is expected to continue increasing. Fifty
percent of those in urban areas live in coastal environments. Sea-level rise and
climate change can be expected to have a disproportionate displacement impact
on these urban, coastal populations
What practices best support sustainable land use qualities?
• At the community level, active transportation (walkability), physical activity,
health and social well being can be fostered by land use planning to include
amenities of green space, parks, sidewalks, street trees and above all personal
safety. Awareness of vulnerabilities to climate change and extreme heat events
can promote sustainability as well as provision for affordable housing and other
needs to protect vulnerable populations from disproportionate exposures.
• Regional scale land use quality most import for advancing sustainability include
compact development patterns, affordable housing, and transportation that
provides ready access to to jobs, wholesome food, financial and civic services,
xii
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
and green space. Regional coordination to avoid unintended consequences from
cumulative disadvantages of multiple small scale land use decisions.
• Recent and Planned Research products relevant TO Land Use Decisions and
Sustainability.are summarized
• ORD products from all ACE, CSS, SHC and SSWR involve quantication of ecosystem
goods and servies, analysis of human health impacts of land use decisions, and
identification of thresholds and tipping points beyond the assimilative capacity of
natural systems to recover from perturbation.
• Numerous indicators, indices, tools and models have been developed to measure,
track, and mitigate the effects of land use changes to communities as well as to
inform community decisions on land use to advance sustainability at the
community level.
• Generation of alternative scenarios and collaborative approaches to community
engagement on specific priorities and options comprise the ORD toolbox.
xiii
-------
1 Introduction: The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Sustainability, and Land Use
Environmental Protection and EPA: Land use has figured prominently in the history of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and in the history of environmental protection
in the United States. This point was reinforced in
speeches, editorials, and numerous papers presented
in 2010 to commemorate the 40-year anniversary of
the EPA (See Table 1) (Joseph Fiksel, Bakshi, Baral,
Guerra, & DeQuervain, 2011) and to celebrate the
agency's success in fulfilling its mission (Box 1).
Land conservation and land preservation represented
the first systematic federal strategy to protect the
environment for future generations. This 19th century
approach was manifested in the establishment of
national parks, federal lands, and national monuments.
In the 20th century, environmental policy shifted to
regulation of environmental contaminants in ambient
media.
Creation of the EPA in 1970, coupled with passage of
enabling legislation, established a new national
paradigm to protect public health and the
environment with emphasis decreasing the risks posed by toxic releases to air, water, and
land.
This new regulatory approach put the federal government in partnership with the states:
Compliance and enforcement of environmental regulations became the responsibility of the
states once a state plan was approved by the EPA.
Sustainability and EPA: The mission statement of the EPA implies a commitment to
principles of sustainability. The publication of "Our Common Future" (World Commission
on Environment and Development, 1987)(See Box 2) strengthened this link through the
participation of EPA Administrator William Ruckleshaus as a member of the Brundtland
Commission and a co-author of "Our Common Future." Ruckelshaus's engagement gave
EPA an early voice in calling out the inconsistency between visions of all people of all
nations living well versus the reality of seemingly unbridled consumption of natural
resources. The two concepts were incompatible.
EPA's role as a leader in sustainability has evolved over the decades, continually reshaped
through federal policies and priorities, standard setting (e.g., Energy Star), official guidance,
Box 1. "The mission of EPA
is to protect human health
and the environment... by
safeguarding the air we
breathe, water we drink,
and land on which we
live ..." www.epa.gov
€D S7/,>
*1 P R
1
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
and direct technical assistance to communities. In addition, many EPA scientists and
engineers have contributed to the published literature in the rapidly maturing discipline of
sustainability (Grossarth & Hecht, 2007; A. Hecht, 2009; A. D. Hecht & Miller, 2010; Jordan
& Benson, In preparation; Jordan & Summers, 2012; Sidle, Benson, Carriger, & Kamai, 2013).
i9,h Century
2tT Century
2i" Century
Focus
Land conservation
Hunan health risk
media/site'
problem-specific
Complex regional'1
giooai problems
Outcome
Lane preservation
Pollution control;
management Of
anthmpccentric
ecological nsk
Global sustainable
devclcpmer/1
Principal
Activity
Land/water
reguiatic*Vsimpte
contaminant control
CompjianceJrened atio-v
technological empi^asis
on problem solving
Integration of social,
economic, and
technological
in^ormatron for holistic-
problem solving
Economic
Focus
Value or land use and
industrial de^e opment
Cost minimisation
Strategic
mvestmenli'lcyig-term
socela well-be rig
Regulatory
Activity
Law
Heavy
Flexible, including
market-based incentives
Conceptual
Model
Expansion vs.
preservation
Command^and-control
Syslems/life cycle
approach
Disciplinary
Approach
Disciplinary/insular
Mullidisc plinary
1 nterdiscipliriaryi'
integrative
Table 1 Two centuries of evolving U.S. Environmental Policy (Fiksel et al, 2011)
Sustainability and the Office of Research and Development: In 2010, the year of EPA's 40th
anniversary, the Office of Research and Development (ORD) embarked on a major effort to
consolidate and refocus research activities to address sustainability. This restructuring, led
by EPA Assistant Administrator Paul Anastas (2009 to
2012), (see Box 3) was consistent with Executive
Order 13514 on "Federal Sustainability."
The proposed transition from a risk assessment
paradigm to one of sustainability was endorsed and
reinforced by the National Research Council (NRC) in
two reports: Sustainability in the US EPA (2011) and
Sustainability for the Nation: Resource Connection
and Governance Linkages (2013).
In restructuring the ORD research agenda, 17 multi-
year plans were consolidated and refocused to create
four Research Programs: "Air, Climate, and Energy"
(ACE); "Chemical Safety and Sustainability "(CSS);
"Safe and Sustainable Water Resources" (SSWR);
Box 2. Sustainable
Development:
"development that
meets the needs of
the present without
compromising the
ability of future
generations to meet
their own needs." Our
Common Future
2
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
"Sustainable and Healthy Communities" (SHC). Two additional focus areas were established
to provide for "Human Health Risk Assessments" and "Homeland Security."
The concepts of "sustainability" and "effective partnerships with EPA stakeholders" became
common themes throughout the ORD research programs. ORD cultivated a closer
engagement with EPA partners and stakeholders to shape the research agenda.
Listening sessions were held for communities, regions, and program offices so that ORD
could hear directly the problems faced by the regulated community and could see where
ORD could provide science-based help (Walters, 2012). The input from stakeholders was
used to define the problems addressed by the newly established research programs- ACE,
CSS, SHC, and SSWR.
Land Use in the Natural and Built Environments. As a result of feedback from the listening
sessions, "Land Use: Natural and Built Environments" was identified by the Sustainable and
Healthy Communities (SHC) Research Program as one of four priority areas that would
become organizing concepts for creating science-based products, tools, and approaches
targeted to community needs.
In addition to Land Use, the three other areas were identified as important to communities
and to achieve sustainability goals. These additional
areas are: "Transportation;" "Buildings and
Infrastructure;" and "Waste and Materials Management."
An ORD project lead was identified for each of these
topic areas and teams were formed under the direction
of the SHC National Program Director (NPD). These
teams of researchers from the ORD Labs and Centers
were tasked by the NPD to prepare white papers
summarizing the published literature and critical
resources for each team topic.
1.1 Scope and Structure of the Land Use
Report
This report is an analysis of the published literature on
current land use practices, policies, and factors that
influence sustainability of communities and ecosystems.
Primary emphasis is on U.S. practices and policies at the
community and neighborhood levels; however, state,
regional, national and, occasionally, international
practices are mentioned.
Contemporary land use decisions related to sustainability
are described; trends and correlations involving land use
3
Box 3. "Sustainability is
our true north. The work
that we do — the research,
the assessments, the
policy development is part
of ensuring we have a
sustainable society; a
sustainable civilization."
Paul Anastas, EPA
Assistant Administrator,
Office of Research and
Development. Testimony
before the U.S. House of
Representatives,
Committee on Science and
Technology, March, 10,
2010.
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
and sustainability goals are addressed. Quantitative correlations from the published
literature are noted when available.
Purpose of the Report: "Land Use: A Powerful Determinant of Sustainable and Healthy
Communities" was produced by the 2013 Land Use Team to fulfill SHC Product 4.1.2
described as follows:
"A synthesis of current practices for land use decisions in the built and natural
environments, including current tools, trends, and research based on the peer-reviewed
literature."
The Land Use Team. The following individuals comprised the 2013 Land Use Team: Llael Cox,
James Andrews, Nick Flanders, Verle Hansen, Ingrid Heilke, Scott Jacobs, Melissa
McCullough, Tanya Moore, Devon Payne-Sturges, Brenda Rashleigh, Marilyn TenBrink, John
Thomas, Claudia Walters, Barbara Walton, James Weaver, Yongping Yuan, Tina Yuen, and
Anthony Zimmer.
All members of the team have advanced degrees and professional experience in key areas
relevant to land use and environmental science. Areas of expertise represented on the
Team were ecology (aquatic terrestrial, landscape, systems and agricultural ecology);
engineering (agricultural; environmental, civil, and chemical engineering); public health,
children's health, community programs ; human health assessments, risk assessments;
hydrology; geology; statistics; city and regional planning; transportation; architecture; as
well as federal and international environmental policy.
Team Approach: The Team members, who are EPA personnel located around the country,
met by conference call once a week for much of 2013 to conduct this work. The conference
calls averaged out to about once every 1 V* weeks for the fiscal year. These meetings were
used to review data, discuss findings, identify next steps and agree on individual
assignments. A bibliography of the relevant literature was compiled by the group in an
electronic EndNoteWeb© library available to EPA employees under an agency license with
Reuters. These 1400+ references compiled in the EndNoteWeb© library served as the
primary resource for this review (Appendix D].
Structure of the document. Information on land use is organized and presented for key
issues related to sustainability. Generally accepted best practices, relevance of the findings
to land use decisions, qualitative and quantitative correlations of cause and effect are
summarized when available. Key areas where information is lacking are identified, as well
as areas of contradiction or conflict based on the published literature. Unintended
consequences of land use decisions are noted: speculations are identified as such. We
conclude with a summary of the current state-of-practice for the topics covered and
identify scientific research needs to support community decisions in support of
sustainability at the community level.
4
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
1.2 Land Use and Sustainability: A critical link
Land Use figures prominently—explicitly and implicitly—as a critical factor in achieving
community sustainability goals (Claudia M. Agudelo-Vera, Mels, Keesman, & Rijnaarts,
2011; Kramer, 2013; Shaw, 1992) Labiosa, 2013) From a systems perspective, land is
critically important as the source of natural capital that supplies materials (biomass, fuels,
food, and water) to the economic and public sectors. In addition, ecosystems provide
services and associated amenities, such as clean air, clean water, biodiversity, natural areas,
and human well-being (Francis et al., 2012; Goldstein et al., 2012; Radeloff et al., 2012).
The conundrum faced by many communities comes when demands for available land
conflict with the critical role of land use for sustaining essential ecological services,
aesthetics, and healthful living conditions. We review several dimensions of land use that
affect and are influenced by community decisions on land use.
A Systems Perspective on Land Use: The Triple Value Model (Figure 1) depicts a holistic,
systems perspective of sustainability as flows of goods, services, and as well as pollutants
such as solid and hazardous waste, air emissions, releases to surface and ground water (J.
Fiksel, 2001; Hacking, 2008). The Triple Value Model was used by the Land Use Team as a
general organizing framework to scope issues regarding Land Use.
5
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Figure 1 Schematic of the Triple Value Model
Interconnections within Community Systems
Built Capital (local to global)
Design Manufacture
Infrastructure: Buildings,
Supply chains Transit, Waste, Energy,
astes
Goals, policies, talent
Products & services
Exposure & risk
Social & Human Capital
Local gov't:
Ability, Skills,
Knowledge
Civil Society
ro es & authorities
Culture, norms
flows of
ecosystem
services
Innovations: a
fti
mfr., supply g
chains, .5
infrastructure &
Pollution
•Af'
Collaboration
on goals
Renewables
Non-
renewables
Land &soils
Local ecosystems
Global ecosystems
Goals and
policies to
protect and
restore
Amenities
Water resources
Global Climate
flows of
ecosystem
services
Air
Biodiversity
Natural Capital
Schematic of the Triple Value Model (Joseph Fiksel, 2006) showing the role of Land (bottom
center) as one of the sources of natural capital for the built environment, which includes
Buildings, Transit, and Waste (upper left-hand corner). Land is also the recipient of
Pollution from the built sector.
The schematic in Figure 2 illustrates the interconnectedness of the main topic areas
addressed in this review. Legend; White boxes framed in black indicate the main topics
(Drivers and States) addressed in the review. Boxes in orange, green, and purple indicate
environment, economy, and public health relevance, respospectively.
6
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Figure 2 Schematic of Main Topics addressed in this report showing interconnected ness in a Vensim type diagram.
Relevance to pillars ofsustainability are also depicted
ENVIRONMENT
tir quality
outcomes
heat island
effect
VMT
combined
water quality
commute
time
. infrastructure
transit-oriented
development
obesity, diabetes,
CVD
productivity
mental health
urban
parks and
greenspace
Legend: White boxes framed in black indicate the main topics (Drivers and States) addressed in the review.
Boxes in orange, green, and purple indicate environment, economy, and public health relevance,
respospectively.
7
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Figure 3 Schematic depicting obesity, an important community issue that involves all four sectors of the SHC to address.
Sources: (Ewing and Cervero, 2010; Lovasi et al. 2011; Lopez, 2004; Kaczynski et al. 2008; Brown et al. 2009)
housing
density
1 % increase in household
density is associated with a
0.07% increase in walking
Land Use Sector
Buildings and /
Infrastructure Sector
1 VirtSrease in land use mix
Index associated with 0.15%
increase in walking
"f% increase in jobs/housing
balance is associated with a
0.19% increase in walking
jobs housing
balance
street ti ees
smaller
setbacks
walkability
physical
activity
walking for
transportation
BMI
;e of septic
systems
sprawl
iin/day of walking -
Ane;
prevents 1 to"
1% increase in strp^rf
onnectivity is associated withi
\ 0.39% increasp^n walking
A 1 point increase in a sraawn
index leads to_aJ)^2*iTTcrease ir
" xherisKof obesity
gain each year
OBESITY
1% increase in transit
accessiblity is^ssociated with
0 .15% increasen walking
vater qualit\
street
connectivity
VMT
1% incr5as*4Qjransit
accessibility it associafSthwU
\ 0.05% decrease in VMT
Transportation
Sector
Waste Sector
Residents drive between 5 and 15%
less in walkabja-neighborhoods than
in^Hto dependant ones
2 Linkages: Environmental Protection, Federal
Regulation, and Land Use Planning
The Department of Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both have major
jurisdiction and responsibility for land use and preservation of natural resources. The
Department of Interior includes the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, US
Fish and Wildlife Service, Geological Survey, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of
Reclamation; the U.S. Department of Agriculture includes the U.S. Forest Service.
The EPA has limited authority over private and public land use decisions; however, both
regulatory and non-regulatory policies and practices of the EPA can have considerable
impact on public health, natural resource management, environmental protection, and
8
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
economic activity. EPA's implementation of federal regulation for pollution control and
prevention, for example, the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), CERCLA,
SARA, FIFRA, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act and Amendments, the Clean Water Act,
Brownfields Act (2002) can all be of consequence for land management and land use
practices. Thus, both legislative and non-legislative activities of the EPA can influence
community decisions on land use.
Local zoning ordinances can be instrumental as a means to achieve community goals for
sustainability (Kopits, McConnell, & Miles, 2012; York & Munroe, 2010). Economic criteria,
including costs and benefits, are important drivers for both environmental protection and
land use. Decisions on land use and environmental protection are also relevant to the
following responsibilities of EPA and communities alike: environmental justice (Baron et al.,
2009; Nweke et al., 2011); adolescent and children's health (Acevedo-Garcia, Osypuk,
McArdle, & Williams, 2008; Almanza, Jerrett, Dunton, Seto, & Pentz, 2012; Gordon-Larsen,
McMurray, & Popkin, 2000; S. M. Wilson, Wilson, Heaney, & Cooper, 2007); market
incentives (Carnoske et al., 2010); pollution monitoring (Karner, Eisinger, & Niemeier, 2010;
Marshall, Brauer, & Frank, 2009); abatement, reclamation; economic valuation of benefits
(Azqueta & Sotelsek, 2007; DiNapoli, 2010; T. A. Litman, 2003)
The complex interrelated elements of environmental protection, federal regulation, and
land use planning constitute an importation reason for EPA to be informed of land use
planning practices of communities as they seek to promote sustainability through their
decisions. EPA collaboration with communities can be an effective means to ensure that
environmental science and know how are marshaled to provide tools that communities can
use to better inform their land use decisions. An additional consideration is that unless land
use is afforded attention relative to its importance in shaping ecological and public health,
then many of the EPA goals for sustainability may become unachievable or require
downward revision.
Municipal Planning and the Role of Zoning. Nearly all land use decisions are made on the
basis of economic criteria. Zoning is now the most widely used means to establish and
enforce designated uses for land at the local level. Once the U.S. Supreme Court
determined the constitutional validity of zoning in 1926 (Village of Euclid, Ohio, v. Ambler),
zoning has become widely used across the United States to manage local land use. Zoning
is routinely used to preserve desirable characteristics of neighborhoods as well as to
proscribe unwanted or nuisance activities, (e.g., noise, livestock in residential areas,
juxtaposition of bars to churches or schools, etc.). Zoning helps ensure that property values
are preserved and tax revenues retained for the communities (Zellner et al., 2009). Zoning
has also been implicated as a key contributor to some unanticipated consequences and
discriminatory results of local land use decisions and ordinances (Maantay, 2001; Phillips &
Goodstein, 2007; J. Schilling & Linton, 2005; S. M. Wilson, Heaney, & Wilson, 2010).
9
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Urban sprawl. The proliferation of suburban communities that emerged after World War II
was a key response to the growing demand for housing, privacy, and space. A rapidly
multiplying population of young adults returning from war-time occupations intensified the
demand for housing (Duany, Plater-Zyberk, & Speck, 2000). The impact of the baby boom,
the interstate highway system, and growing appetites for material goods became the
drivers for clusters of low-density housing at the perimeter of urban developments. These
communities were dubbed "urban sprawl" or just plain "sprawl" (Danielsen, Lang, & Fulton,
1999; Duany, et al., 2000; R. Ewing, Pendall, & Chen, 2003a; Kunstler, 1993).
As the population, the economy, and highway travel increased, the impact on the land was
often detrimental to the environment and the ecological services it provides (Knaap, Song,
& Nedovic-Budic, 2007). Sprawl has been identified as one of the most significant pressures
leading to deforestation (Manning, 2008), loss of native habitats, reductions in the numbers
and kinds of species—both flora and fauna—as well as loss of biodiversity in general (Faeth,
Bang, & Saari, 2011; Tewksbury et al., 2002). At the same time that the numbers of many
native species are declining, undesirable nuisance or "weedy" species have emerged in
geographic areas where not previously found and have become established as aggressive
competitors for food, nesting space, and other resources (Pickett et al., 2011). These
opportunistic, invasive species further accelerate the loss of biodiversity by outcompeting
native species for habitat and food (Decker et al., 2012; Dolan, Moore, & Stephens, 2011;
McKane et al., 2002). The conversion of agricultural lands and open space to developed use
is also accelerating and has become a major factor changing the U.S. landscape from
predominately rural to otherwise (Conway & Lathrop, 2005). Increasingly, farm land is
converted to human needs for {Francis, 2012, Farmland conversion to non-agricultural uses
in the US and Canada: current impacts and concerns for the future] for housing,
transportation, raw materials for commerce and infrastructure, and to meet recreational
needs (Francis, et al., 2012; Weber, Sloan, & Wolf, 2006).
2.1 Drivers of Land Use Decisions and Change
This DPSIR conceptual model (Figure 3) (Wolfslehner & Vacik, 2011) was embraced as a
useful simplification of the complex and interrelated forces that influence Land Use
decisions. Economics, infrastructure and social considerations are perceived as principle
drivers at all scales of land use decision making — individual, community, county, state,
regional and national.
Decisions on land use can have profound consequences—both positive and negative-
subject of course to the views and values of those in the community served. For the
purpose of this document, we evaluate consequences of land use decisions from the
perspective of advancing an integrated economic, social, and environmental agenda to
achieve sustainability objectives for the stakeholders involved.
10
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Box 4. Urban and Coastal
Populations
As populations, transportation networks, and
appetites for affluence increase, the demand
for land and the natural capital that it provides
are subject to market forces of supply and
demand. In addition to market forces,
government and municipal policies can
intervene, for example, to protect and restore
natural areas (Crossman, Bryan, & King, 2009;
Goldstein, et al., 2012; Kunstler, 1993).
Megatrends Affecting Land Use.
80 percent of the current US
population lives in cities—this
percentage is expected to continue
increasing.
Fifty percent of those in urban areas
live in coastal environments. From a
long-term perspective, sea-level rise
and climate change can be expected
to have a disproportionate
Demands for housing, transportation, and
natural resources constitute key drivers for
ownership and access to land. Food and water,
infrastructure, commerce, recreation, waste
disposal plus less tangible needs inherent in
cultural and religious practices, aesthetics, and
spirituality —all contribute to the demand for
land and access to land. (Bryan, Grandgirard, &
Ward, 2009; R. W. Burchell & Mukherji, 2003; C.
displacement impact on these urban,
coastal populations.
J. Dawkins & Nelson, 2002; R. Ewing, Cervero, & Trb, 2001). Pride of ownership and social
status can also be motivators to acquire land (R. Bennett, Tambuwala, Rajabifard, Wallace,
& Williamson, 2013; ERS, 2012b).
Impact of Population Growth on Demand for Land. The impact of U.S. population growth on
future demand for land is potentially huge. Moreover, fast growth alone is associated with
poor economic performance (Fan, Wang, Qiu, & Wang, 2009; Annemarie Schneider,
Woodcock, Schneider, & Woodcock, 2008). In a study of the 100 largest U.S. metropolitan
areas prosperity was found to be inversely related to growth (L. M. A. Bettencourt & West,
2011; Fodor, 2012). Faster growth rates were associated with lower incomes, greater
income declines, and higher poverty rates. Unemployment rates tend to be higher in faster
growing areas. The 25 slowest growing metro areas outperformed the 25 fastest growing in
every category including per capita income. People in the mature (slowest growing) metro
areas earned an average of $8,455 more in per capita personal income in 2009 (ibid).
Another notable trend is that 80 percent of the current US population lives in cities—this
percentage is expected to continue increasing (Pickett, et al., 2011). Fifty percent of those in
urban areas live in coastal environments (Box 4). From a long-term perspective, sea-level
rise and climate change can be expected to have a disproportionate displacement impact
on these urban, coastal populations (Barbier, Georgiou, Enchelmeyer, & Reed, 2013; Boruff,
Emrich, & Cutter, 2005; National Resource Council, 2013; SiadatMousavi, Jose, Stone, &
leee, 2009; Sidle, etal., 2013).
11
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
The growing human population will increase demand for land. The world population,
currently estimated at seven billion, is anticipated to reach nine billion by 2050 U.S. Census
Bureau (2012). The estimates for the U.S. population in 2050 differ, yet the magnitude of
increase is around 100 million (Box 5). The inevitable consequence of rapidly increasing
populations is a growing demand for housing, food, transportation. At the same time waste
generation will increase. Satisfying human needs will mean a greater demand for land,
resulting in diminishing supply and increasing prices.
Workarounds and modifications to reduce or
accommodate the demand for land and space.
Because land is a natural resource subject to
intense and intensifying demand, a sustainability
imperative calls for substitutes, innovative
workarounds, and novel approaches to lessen
demand for land and the services it provides.
Examples of positive technology impacts include
increased food supply through improved
agricultural practices, crop improvement to
achieve increase yields, more effective and
efficient pest control. Other trends have been
the emergence of urban gardens, compact
development, combinations of residential and
commercial uses, and greater reliance on vertical
structures to create more space.
All of these changes represent ways to use land more efficiently to meet ever growing
demands for space A variety of urban energy and water harvesting techniques were found
to have the potential to cover up to 100% of electricity demand, 55% of heat demand, and
52% of tap water demand in the Netherlands (C. M. Agudelo-Vera, Leduc, Mels, & Rijnaarts,
2012). At the same time, innovative technologies can have unintended consequences,
including health impacts, disproportionate exposures, inequitable division of benefits, or
exacerbation of related issues.
Financial and Legal Forces. No matter who makes specific land use decisions, financial and
legal considerations are foremost considerations (Bryan, et al., 2009; Goldstein, et al., 2012;
Keeney, 2006; Terrapin Bright Green, 2012). Financial considerations may include the price
of land, return on investment, time to recovery of investment, amount and duration of
indebtedness incurred, cost of servicing debt, maintenance costs, cash flow limitations,
taxes, and investment risk (speculation). Legal considerations are likely to apply to intended
purpose and may involve federal regulations or restrictions by states, municipalities, zoning
ordinances, design standards, and building codes. Yet another factor in land use decisions
Box 5. Population Growth:
The U.S. population, currently
estimated at 316 million, is
projected to increase by 100
million by 2050. (US Department
of Commerce, Census Bureau,
June 14, 2013).
The U.S. population is projected
to grow 42 percent between
2010 and 2050, from 310 million
to 439 million (Vincent and
Velkoff 2010).
12
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
can be the indirect impact of infrastructure investments, fiscal policy, and other state and
local policies that can shape future development patterns.
Stakeholder Preference and Acceptance. The scope and scale of financial and legal factors
differ across commercial (business), public (federal, state, municipal), and private (individual,
household, religious) interests. A decision maker's allegiance to or affiliation with any of
these groups is likely to influence values, priorities, and the sense of responsibilities among
decision makers. The fact that decision makers, as individuals, may belong to multiple
interest groups adds to the complexity and richness of issues that shape land use decisions.
Major categories of interest groups are the following:
• Commercial (business)
o Producers of the built environment—developers, architecture and
engineering firms, construction firms
o Consumers of the built environment—all firms that own or lease commercial
buildings or industrial facilities
• Public (governmental)
o Scales - Federal and state government, regional agencies, local government
o Levels of Decision Authority - Professional Staff, Appointed Volunteers,
Elected Officials
• Private (individuals, households, clubs, places of worship)
o Home owners, renters, Community Development Corporations (CDCs),
o Social clubs
o Churches, synagogues
13
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
Figure 4 Land Use DPSIR
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Environmental Pressures
Landuse Changes
Sprawl
Education s
Outreach
Urban
AlKjandwinnent
Deforestation «
Deve^jetatwn
Environmental
State
Monitoring,
Remediation
& Restoration
Communities
Urban
Agriculture
Schools, Parks
ft Playgrounds
Hedieal
Treatments
Population
Distribution
Commercial/
Residents M«
Disease Vectors
ft Pathogens
affects
Hum#n Wetl-bewg
Ecosystem Services
SL
Valuation of
£cO'Sflfvt«
Water Resources
Water
Quantity
Cultural ft
Social Well-being
14
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Issues Faced by Decision Makers
• How can choices for land use affect favorable outcomes for achieving sustainability
goals?
• What scientific information or insights will inform decisions beyond what is provided
by the commercial and private sectors?
• How can scientific know-how from the US EPA augment and support the complex
economic, public health, and environmental considerations of the various interest
groups without replicating the efforts of trade associations, professional societies,
municipalities, academia, or private enterprise?
• Are there non-regulatory actions or practices that can strengthen the economy,
protect public health, and still safeguard the natural environment?
Guidelines and Resources for Land Use Decision makers
In general, public and commercial land use decisions are guided by written policies or plans
developed to steer decisions in favor of valued outcomes. Such guidance takes many forms.
Most common are the following:
• Comprehensive plans. These can be long range or near term and are commonly
directed to state, regional, and local scales.
• Fiscal programming. Use of spending authorities such as capital plans and annual
budgets, are effective as driving forces for land use decisions
• Formal policies. These can take the form of federal, state, or local regulations, fiscal
incentives, and precedence.
• Designated projects. These often occur as commitments for infrastructure such as,
roads, utilities, parks, individual buildings, subdivisions, or other developments
designated for a specific purpose (e.g., multi-unit housing, shopping mall, hospital,
civic centers, parks)
Despite the existence of formal plans and policies to guide land use decisions, in practice,
there is enormous variation in how land use decisions are made and what factors are most
influential for land use outcomes. Because of this wide variability, it often appears that
land use decisions are largely ad hoc endeavors.
Variability in how decisions are made is the norm, yet generalizations are possible. At the
state level, local land use authority is governed by enabling statutes (Krane, Rigos, & Hill,
2001). The majority of states follow either Dillon's Rule or Home Rule. Virginia is an
example of a state governed by Dillon's Rule, requiring state legislation before local
government can implement local land use regulations and fiscal policies. In contrast, states
that follow Home Rule can regulate local development and set fiscal policy resides with
cities and counties. Variations in the implementation of Home Rule is considerable,
moreover, Home Rule practices continue to evolve over time (Barron, 2002-2003).
15
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Additionally, the overall structure of governance varies from state to state. The geographic
scope, the presence of overlapping jurisdictions, and extent of inter-governmental
coordination are all affected by the structure of local government (International City County
Management Association, 2010). In turn, the relative level of jurisdictional fragmentation
(i.e., units of local government/person) the relative strength of enforcement responsibility
at the county level, the extent to which public utilities and other infrastructure are provided
and maintained by the public. All of these factors shape the context for decision-making to
build more sustainable communities. Despite the complexity and variability that
characterize local land use decisions in the U.S. there are some generally accepted practices
attributable to the various levels of governance. These processes are described in the
following sections for state, regional, local, neighborhood decision making. Aspects of land
use planning that may affect public health are discussed.
State Processes
Over the past 30 years, many states have passed legislation aimed at reining in uncontrolled,
haphazard development (see Figures3 and Figure 4 ) Hawaii is notable for establishing a
statewide system of formally designated land use zones. Similarly; a number of other states
have adopted significant policies that shape urban development and rural land conservation.
Another motivation for states to update planning statutes is to encourage the preservation
of sensitive undeveloped land (Meek, 2002-). Several statewide reforms are specifically
designed to improve local land use planning and regulation.
The statewide processes that shape land use and development are primarily about
programming infrastructure funds, implementation of state agency policies and project
design rather than comprehensive planning.
16
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
A
i'/
I
\
J
y
UPDATED
STATES
J Substantially Updated
B Slightly Updated
¦ Moderately Updated
J Not Updated
Extent States have Updated Their Planning Statutes as of 1999.
Figure 6 State Planning Statutes (American Planning Association, 1999)
Although State-wide plans do exist, they are focused primarily on policy intended to guide
other regional and local efforts to shape development. Two notable exceptions in this
category are New Jersey and Maryland. The New Jersey State Development and
Redevelopment Plan contains a fairly detailed statewide policy map of land use categories.
The Maryland Plan 6) is designed to align state land conservation efforts (e.g., farmland and
critical habitat areas), priority growth area designations with state transportation plans.
17
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Strength of State Role in Local Land-use Planning (1997)
Weak
Figure 7 State Role in LocoI Planning (American Planning Association, 1999)
POLICY MAP
o< the
New Jersey State Development
and Redevelopment Plan
Figure 8 NJ State Development Plan (New Jersey State Planning Commission, 2001)
18
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
GREENPRINT
AGPRINT
GROWTH PRINT
STATE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Figure 9 PlanMaryland (Maryland Department of Planning, 2011)
State agencies also impact land development indirectly through the design and construction
of major projects such freeways. For example, the number and design of freeway
interchanges, designation of toll roads, and frequency of maintenance can all affect
subsequent development and market demand for land.
Regional Agency Processes
At the regional scale, long- range planning and programming for capital infrastructure are
the most influential activities that shape regional growth patterns. Across the U.S., 342
metropolitan planning organizations are designated responsibility by U.S. DOT for 20-year,
long-range transportation plans and five-year transportation improvement programs
(capital plans). Often these regional agencies also govern regional planning for housing and
community development. Environmental and economic development is most commonly
planned in dedicated organizational units; however, in some cases, the Municipal Planning
Organizations (MPO) or Council of Governments (COG) also do regional planning functions
related to the environment and economic development.
19
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
YUBA
COUNTY
YJBA
COUNTY
SUTTER
COUNTY
iSUTTER A
WOWfY
YOLO CObNTY
YOLO COUNTY ^
EL DORADO
COUNTY
SACRA,'/EN TO
JCUNTY
SACRA MENIG
~~$0UNTY
DEVELOPMENT
Base Case Scenario
DEVELOPMENT
Preferred Blueprint
Scenario for 2050
Figure 10 Sacramento Blueprint (Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2007)
County Processes
The typical role of counties in shaping land use patterns is connected to their approval of
development in unincorporated areas and provision of infrastructure (roads, sewer, and
water) to serve low density rural development. However, in some parts of the country
counties have taken the lead on rural land conservation, particularly farmland protection.
In a handful of states, counties have a larger role to play in the approval of urban and
suburban development and the provision of infrastructure to serve such communities. In
some cases local government has been consolidated into unified city-county government.
In other states (most notably Virginia and Maryland) counties are the primary unit of
government overseeing development approval. Finally, in a handful of states, county
governments approve significant amounts of development in unincorporated areas just
beyond the boundaries of incorporated cities. In each case, the county processes are
similar the municipal processes described below. In most instances, county governments
do very limited comprehensive planning on land use and development.
Municipal Processes
The municipal governments (cities, towns and townships) are the unit of local government
most closely associated with direct control over land use. Some of the basic activities
related to land use are defined by state laws and statutes. These statutes create a baseline
for the local processes that shape land use in any state, but a number of factors in each city
20
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
also determine how sustainability is considered - size of the community, level of technical
capacity, political culture, etc.
FIGURE 5
Popularity of Various Plan Elements
PLAN ELEMENT NUMBER OF STATE LAWS WITH PLAN ELEMENT
Land Use 49
Transportation 45
Community Facilities 38
Agriculture 31
Recreation 30
Housing 25
Implementation 24
Policy 21
Redevelopment 20
Historic Preservation 15
Natural Hazards 1 5
Economic Development 1 4
Public Participation 1 1
Energy 8
Community Design 7
Critical & Sensitive Areas 7
Local Coordination 5
Urban Growth Limits 4
Air Ouality 3
Human Services 1
Figure 11 Popularity of Plan Elements (APA, 1999)
Most municipal governments have a general or comprehensive plan in place. With respect
to sustainability, many municipalities choose whether and when to do the following: (1)
align zoning and other related policies to existing plans, ( 2) specify a level of detail that
facilitates outcomes envisioned in the plan, ( 3) cover a breadth of functional areas, and( 4)
update their plans .
Community Priorities
Several recent national surveys elucidate community land use planning priorities, some
from the perspective of municipal officials and some from individuals. In 2012, the
American Planning Association (APA) polled a statistically valid and representative sample of
the U.S. population (a total of 1,308 respondents participated) about their priorities for
planning in their communities.
Highest community priorities. A strong majority of respondents (79%) support community
planning and 67% believe it is an important element to achieve economic recovery
(American Planning Association, 2012). When asked the most important issues for local
planners address, job creation (70%) was at the top of the list, closely followed by, safety
(69%), schools (67%), protecting neighborhoods (64%), and water quality (62%).
Other community priorities. Often cited as high priorities were bikeways (19%), walking
trails (18%), and sprawl (16%). However, when asked to envision high priorities for their
ideal community, the most commonly cited elements were having locally owned businesses
nearby (55%), being able to stay in the same neighborhood while aging (54%), and the
7
r
7
:p
21
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
availability of sidewalks (53%), energy-efficient homes (52%), transit (50%), and having
neighborhood parks (49%).
Local Policies for Sustainability. The International City/County Management Association,
(ICMA), conducted a survey of local government sustainability policies and programs in
2010. They received responses from 2,176 local governments. The economy (94.2%), energy
conservation (69.6%), and the environment (60.7%) were most likely to be rated a priority
or a high priority, with less than half identifying housing for all income groups (48%), social
justice (39%), public transit (34%), green jobs (29%), and climate change (19%) as a priority
(International City County Management Association, 2010). In another survey querying
planning directors across the nation, the findings indicated that about 30% had
incorporated public health goals into their comprehensive or sustainability plans, and that
this was often prompted by community support or awareness of public health issues
(Hodgson, 2011).
In addition, as mentioned previously, the EPA held listening sessions in 2011 to elicit
feedback from stakeholders within and outside of EPA. Communities, trade associations,
professional organizations, states, and EPA regions in seven towns and cities across the
United States were among those participating in listening sessions. From this diverse group,
several frequently mentioned land use and planning priorities emerged. These included: (1)
inclusive, well-informed, and collaborative town planning, (2) understanding the
unintended consequences or disproportionate burdens of zoning and regulations, (3)
increasing higher-density mixed-use infill, (4) preserving open space and agricultural land,
(5) increasing access to safe parks and recreational areas, (6) preserving historic places and
neighborhoods, (7) adjusting to dramatic increases or decreases in population, (8) reining in
sprawl, (9) redeveloping abandoned urban areas, (10) promoting inclusive and aesthetically
pleasing design standards (Walters, 2012).
These diverse results illustrate a strong community interest in planning for economic vitality
as well as alternative development patterns that emphasize mixed uses and housing types,
walkability, and strong community support for local businesses. Neighborhood awareness
and interest in meeting needs of aging residents and addressing recreational needs of
citizens for accessible parks was evident.
22
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3 Literature Review: Impacts of Land Use on
Environment, Economy, Human Well Being
3.1 Impacts of Population Change on Land Use
3.1.1 Urbanization
Urbanization refers to both the rising population in urban centers and the expansion of land
developed for human purpose. Increasing populations in urban centers is the combined
result the influx of people from rural areas, preferences of immigrants for urban areas, and
growth due to births. The portion of Americans living in urban areas, including cities and
suburbs, has increased sharply in the past few decades—from about 50% in 1920 to over
80% in 2008 (U.S Census Bureau, 2012). The urban population in the US increases an
estimated 1.2% annually (ibid). The portion of
land in the United States put to urban use is
projected to expand from 3.1% in 2000 to 8.1% in
2050 (D. J. Nowak & Walton, 2005).
Much of the literature on sprawl shows that the
amount of developed land per person has
increased in the past 25 years (ERS, 2009; U.S
Census Bureau, 2012; U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 2009).
The decadal patterns suggest that the rate of
urban expansion is accelerating (David J. Nowak,
Walton, Dwyer, Kaya, & Myeong, 2005). Similarly,
deforestation is also increasing to affect ever
larger areas (ibid).
Land Development Rate. Reports are conflicting
on the rate of land developed per person and
whether this rate is increasing or decreasing even
as overall populations increase. Holcombe and
Staley (2001) challenged reports purporting to
show increasing rates of land development per
capita; they claimed flawed methodology. In
contrast the National Resources Inventory (2007)
released methodologically revised figures for land
development dating back to 1992. These revised, corrected figures corroborated the finding
of the earlier analysis showing accelerated conversion of agricultural and rural land to
developed uses (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2009).
23
Box 6. "Eighty percent of
everything ever built in
America has been built since
the end of World War II. This
tragic landscape of highway
strips, parking lots, housing
tracts, megamall, junked cities,
and ravaged countryside is not
simply an expression of our
economic predicament, but in
large part a cause. It is the
everyday environment where
most Americans live and work,
and it represents a gathering
calamity whose effects we
have hardly begun to
measure." James Howard
Kunstler. The Geography of
Nowhere
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
In the 37 most populous U.S. metropolitan areas,
more than population over the past 20 years (Lew
Some have declared this alarming (Kunstler, 1993)
A movement to curb sprawl and to encourage inf
impact on urban expansion, particularly in the
largest cities. Infill development represents a
new land use in a previously developed area. It
may involve increasing the intensity of use of a
parcel, developing unused land that is
surrounded by development, or repurposing
previous development to a new use. Among the
51 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S.,
almost 75% increased the share of infill housing
development during 2005-2009 compared to
2000-2004 (US Environmental Protection
Agency, 2012b). The percent of new
construction that is infill varies widely among
cities, from only 2% in Prescott, Arizona, to as
high as 80% in San Jose, California (ibid). On
average, infill accounts for 20% of all new
residential construction for medium and large
cities.
Accelerated urbanization can have important
impacts on the environment, human well-being,
and the economy. One of the challenges for a
community is to assure that adverse
environmental impacts are managed to
minimize loss of ecological goods and services.
Environmental Impacts of Land
Development
The development of natural land for human
needs is recognized as the primary cause of
reduced acreage in wetlands and forest cover.
Many of the negative environmental impacts of
urbanization have been described in the
literature. These negative ecological effects
may initially be manifested as increases in peak
river flows, in surface water runoff, in stream
sediment loads, and in higher concentrations of
urbanized areas have expanded by 57%
is, Knapp, Schindewolf, & Jamie, 2013).
(See Box 6)
I development is having a noticeable
Box 7. EPA Product Highlight
EnviroAtlas, SHC Project 1.2.3, is a GIS
tool that maps geography,
demographics, and the production of
ecosystem services. The latter includes
immobilization and degradation of
toxicants. Shading and cooling
resulting from tree foliage. Ecosystems
contribute to water quality, carbon
sequestration, aquifer recharge,
habitat for flora and fauna. Through
primary production ecosystems
support food and fiber production.
Functioning ecosystems can mitigate
impacts of natural disasters.
Future releases of the EnviroAtlas will
include more types of information,
such as built environment measures,
transportation, waste, and urban land
use. These data can be combined with
measured data and models to estimate
condition and value of these resources.
The EnviroAtlas is intuitively designed
and does not require expertise to
navigate its basic functions, therefore
it is a resource for a wide variety of
users, including local decision makers,
natural resource managers, and public
health professionals.
24
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
nutrients and bacteria (e.g. E. coli).
Impaired Ecological Function: As land is developed for human use, loading of organic and
inorganic contaminants to air, water and soil (e.g., nitrogen oxides, mercury, and pesticides)
increase (Nagy & Lockaby, 2011). The longer term impacts are likely to be manifested in loss
of ecological function, such as decreased carbon storage, loss of species (R. I. McDonald,
Kareiva, & Forman, 2008; National Risk Management Research Laboratory, 2010),
decreased resistance to perturbations (Bogunovich, 2009; Coaffee, Moore, Fletcher, &
Bosher, 2008), whether natural or manmade. Disruptions of energy flow through systems
and diminished nutrient cycling may also occur (Nagy & Lockaby, 2011).
Land conversion alters the diversity of local species, and may increase the portion of the
regional forest stock within urban boundaries. A projection of urbanization's effects on
ecosystems compared a dispersed scenario at an estimated 50% increase in the per capita
consumption of urban land by 2030 compared to a compact scenario that assumed a 50%
decrease in the per capita consumption of urban land. The dispersed scenario was predicted
to endanger more species worldwide and decreased the buffer around protected areas (R. I.
McDonald, et al., 2008).
Urbanization affects flora and fauna and the ecosystems they inhabit. Disruption of species
interactions, or habitat disturbance, can cause reductions in native species or outbreaks of
invading species to create the emergence of new pest species, such as arthropods, plants,
and birds (A. B. Bennett & Gratton, 2012; Decker, et al., 2012; Dolan, et al., 2011).
Only 10-20% of the landscape in city centers is estimated to be capable of supporting plants
and animals (A. B. Bennett & Gratton, 2012). Increasing levels of urbanization are associated
with declining levels of biodiversity and species abundance. For example, Bennett and
Gratton (2012) found that parasitoid diversity decreased by approximately 10% in highly
urbanized sites compared to neighboring rural sites.
Urbanization causes deforestation and habitat fragmentation. Approximately 5.3% of
forestland is estimated to be subsumed by urban growth by 2050 (D. J. Nowak & Walton,
2005). In most cases, forest is simply cut down; however, approximately 20% of this may
remain as urban forest (ibid). All of these changes are cumulative and impact the provision
of ecosystem goods and services, which must be balanced with the need for developed land
to meet the needs of human society (Hogan et al., 2012; Kramer, 2013).
A projection based in Britain found that the predicted increase in urban land cover by 2031
would have variable impacts on ecosystem services depending on whether growth followed
a dense (roughly 20 people per acre) or a suburban pattern (roughly 13 people per acre)
(Eigenbrod et al., 2011). The dense pattern increased the proportion of the population living
near rivers, increasing impervious surfaces and causing a 10% increase in peak flows due to
increases in impervious cover. The suburban pattern tripled the projected loss of stored
25
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
carbon and agricultural production compared to the densification scenario (ibid). There is
evidence that wider riparian corridors dominated by trees may protect stream channels
from dramatic changes due to urbanization and densification (Kang, Storm, & Marston,
2010).
Urban Expansion. The expansion of urban areas has particularly important implications for
the use and management of public holdings, including national forests, national parks, and
state and locally administered resources. As urban residents frequently travel to exurban
areas for outdoor recreation, the demands placed on forest ecosystems in close proximity
to growing urban centers pose challenges for natural resource managers. Another concern
is that of human safety when the public is brought in contact with wild life, such as brown
bears, black bears, wolves, foxes, coyotes, and other hazards of the outdoors (e.g. poison
ivy, mosquitos, ticks, chiggers, arboviruses).
Heightened resource use, potential conflicts of humans in contact with nature, conflicts
regarding recreational opportunities, seasonal and permanent home development can
greatly complicate the issues that must be addressed in protecting the health and
sustainability of a community expanding its geographic
perimeter into natural areas. Because of these
potential conflict, urbanization has been predict
by some experts as one of the most significant
impacts of land use in 21st century (David J.
Nowak, et al., 2005).
Economic benefits of agglomeration
Studies on the economic and human well-being
impacts of urbanization are becoming more
prevalent. Some authors contend that urbanized
areas benefit from agglomeration, which
produces greater innovation, efficiencies and
productivity (Seto, Sanchez-Rodriquez, & Fragkias,
2010).
As more of the country becomes urbanized and a
larger portion of the population lives in cities,
these societal benefits may accrue. Increases in
social interaction and information networks
associated with more dense living conditions
could stimulate increases in both innovation and
productivity for city dwellers. An alternative
perspective has been presented by Radeloff
(2012) in which he points to the limitations of
Box 8. "Land-use policies can
affect trends, but only so much.
The basic economic and
demographic factors shaping land-
use changes in the United States
are powerful, and even fairly
dramatic policy changes, showed
only moderate deviations from the
business-as-usual scenario. . . .
Land-use policies can affect trends,
but only so much. The basic
economic and demographic factors
shaping land-use changes in the
United States are powerful, and
even fairly dramatic policy
changes, showed only moderate
deviations from the business-as-
usual scenario." Radeloff, 2012
26
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
land-use policies in shaping land use in the U.S. (see Box 8).
Environmental awareness and urbanization
Based on a survey, Nagy and Lockaby (2011) reported that environmental awareness
declines as populations became more urbanized. Environmental awareness, such as
recognition that forests contribute to water quality, was highest among groups involved in
outdoor recreation or employment, which is uncommon among city dwellers. This finding
suggests that increased outreach and opportunities for outdoor recreation promote
environmental awareness among urban residents and may be important for fostering
concepts of environmental stewardship in future generations.
Gentrification
Urbanization tendencies can be detrimental to wellbeing of lower SES groups. The
reinvestment in city centers that follows population growth has been implicated for
spurring gentrification in some cities and shrinking towns elsewhere. Gentrification is the
transformation of urban neighborhoods towards higher incomes, more expensive housing
costs, and predominance of advanced education levels, and is considered a fundamental
process which accelerated in the 1990s (Abel & White, 2011). The consequence of all this
upward mobility is the marginalization of lower income people. Those who service the
community are excluded from it. Lower income residents may be displaced, particularly if
provisions for affordable housing are inadequate. For example, increasing demand for
walkable urban neighborhoods has led to gentrification in historically affordable
neighborhoods in the city centers, displacing poorer residents in some cases. The Brookings
Institution found "places with more walkable features have...become more gentrified over
the past decade" (Leinberger & Alfonzo, 2012).
While revitalization of city centers is generally framed as a positive change, lower income
residents may be displaced to less safe or undesirable areas, exacerbating inequities. A
study in Seattle indicated that gentrifying areas were less likely to contain facilities that filed
for toxic release inventories (TRI). Of the 11 new faculties reporting to TRI during the one
year study period, none of them were in gentrifying areas (Abel & White, 2011). In a study
of hypertension prevalence in Chicago, the researchers looked at health impacts of
proximity to TRI facilities. Hypertension was found to be less common in gentrifying
neighborhoods, even after controlling for other known risk factors (Morenoff et al., 2007).
Thus, urbanization is tied to numerous economic, societal, and environmental
consequences that can create concerns for disproportionate exposures. The pressures in
play to create gentrified neighborhoods can also foster and exacerbate homelessness,
segregation, and destroy neighborhood cohesiveness for some factions of society.
Quantitative relations for urbanization
Throughout this report, sections on "Quantitative relations" are used to highlight
correlations between land use qualities and outcomes that have been quantified. These are
27
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
not necessarily the most important associations, nor does inclusion signify statistically
significant results. Rather these are the instances we encountered for which quantitative
parameters were presented. All of the quantitative sections are delineated by green
backgrounds for easy navigation.
• A 50% increase in per capita consumption of urban land worldwide would put 3% of
species at-risk of extinction by 2030 (R. I. McDonald, et al., 2008) Another
approximation is that of Thomas et al., 2004, who estimated an 18% extinction rate
estimated to be caused by global climate change (Thomas et al., 2004).
• Seventy-one percent of large metropolitan regions saw an increased share of infill
housing development (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012b).
• A suburban growth pattern has been projected to cause three times more loss of
stored carbon and agricultural production compared to a densification scenario in
Britain (Eigenbrod, et al., 2011)
• A dense growth pattern has been projected to cause a 10% increase in peak river
flows by 2031 (Eigenbrod et al, 2011)
3.1.2 Sprawl
Emergence of sprawl
Sprawl was recognized as an emerging landscape attribute in 1937 by Earle Draper (Black,
1996). He coined the term "sprawl" to describe an unintended consequence of converging
economic and social drivers to have an unplanned negative impact on the environment.
The environmental impact is that of reduced natural capital and ecological services.
With the end of World War II, returning veterans became a significant demographic group
with the energy, appetites, and growing affluence to drive markets for manufactured goods
and land. Federal programs and policies including the Gl Bill, the 30-year mortgage, the
Federal Highway Act, the affordability of the automobiles, and a zoning process that
separated uses and often required minimum lot sizes culminated in the greatest economic
expansion the United States ever experienced.
The result was a life style where people from the most humble beginnings could expect that
hard work combined with modest investments to learn vocational skills, apprenticeships,
and professional skills could enjoy the rewards of full employment, material wealth, health
care, leisure time, and well educated children, and other amenities characterized as "the
good life".
Thus the population of the country improved its life style and life expectancy to achieve
privileges reserved for the wealthy in previous eras. This realization of the American dream
materialized as proliferation in single family houses, with big yards, with space for gardens
and play areas for children.
28
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Although sprawl was spawned during a period of exuberant economic expansion and
population explosion, this land-intensive form of expansion is still the predominant form of
growth in major metropolitan areas (R. W. Burchell & Mukherji, 2003). In recent decades,
both inexpensive gasoline prices and the introduction of telecommuting options may have
further enabled sprawl. Lower fuel prices keep travel affordable; telecommuting makes
travel to work unnecessary.
Sprawl today
Nearly all metropolitan regions are growing outward more than they are growing upward
(multistory buildings) or inward (land reuse or urban redevelopment) (Box 9). From 2005 to
2009, more than 200 metropolitan regions still had the majority of new home construction
in undeveloped green fields. Urban infill is not a common approach to satisfy the market
demand for land by urban populations (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012b).
The rate of outward expansion from the urban core may have slowed in recent years;
however, sprawl and decentralized growth are still predominant growth patterns
throughout the United States (Kramer, 2013; US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012b).
Per capita utilization of land, that is the area of land occupied per person, continues to
increase although the rate of increase may have slowed over the past 25 years (R. I.
McDonald, Forman, & Kareiva, 2010). Regional variations exist, for example, in Maryland
single family lot sizes increased in the 1990s (Kopits, et al., 2012) consistent with increases
in per capita utilization of land despite population declines (Hasse & Lathrop, 2003). A
study by the Urban Transportation Center showed that in the Chicago area, decentralization
peaked in the 1960s
and declined through
the 1990s (Sen et al.,
1998).
More recent literature
acknowledges that
sprawl manifests in
multiple ways
(Carruthers & Vias,
2005; Kumar, Pathan, &
Bhanderi, 2007; E. H.
Wilson, Hurd, Civco,
Prisloe, & Arnold, 2003;
Zhang & Wang, 2006; G.
Zhou & He, 2007). In
addition to a
continuous low density expansion outwards associated with suburban development,
exurban, monocentric, polycentric and leapfrog patterns of expansion have emerged. The
Figure 12 Change in Land consumption per capita in metropolitan areas, 1990-2000.
Change in land consumption (m2/person)
<-200
¦ -200 to-150
29
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
expression exurban, from extra-urban, generally refers
to a primarily residential commuter towns (aka
"bedroom communities") on the outskirts of a town or
city (Suarez-Rubio, Lookingbill, & Wainger, 2012).
These are situated beyond suburban areas, and are
often characterized as leapfrog developments that are
separated from the city by rural or open space.
Developed land per capita was higher on average in
2007 than it was 25 years ago. This fact, combined
with an increasing population, establishes good
reason to conclude that the current rate of land
utilization is unsustainable. In this case, unsustainable
is a function of the calculation that the there is not
enough land on earth to satisfy continued rates of
land occupancy per capita.
Over the past 25 years, there has been over a 55%
increase in the amount of land developed nationally
(70.96 million acres in 1982 compared to 111.25
million acres in 2007) (ERS, 2009). This 55% increase
in developed land was accompanied by a 30 percent
increase in the US population (238 million in 1982
compared to 308 million people in 2007) (U.S Census
Bureau, 2012). From a national perspective, this is an
increase in land consumption from 0.29 acres per person in 1982 to 0.36 acres per person in
2007.
Land conversion in the United States is expected to increase the percent of developed
urban land from 3.1% to 8.1% by 2050, consuming a significant amount of forest and
cropland (D. J. Nowak & Walton, 2005). In 2003, Burchell and Mukherji, 2003, estimated
that 18.8 million acres of land would be used to build 26.5 million new housing units as well
as 26.5 billion square feet of new nonresidential space (R. W. Burchell & Mukherji, 2003).
Transportation enables sprawl
Sprawl has been perpetuated by the increasing availability of private transportation (French,
Story, & Jeffery, 2001; Frumkin, 2002) and the trend to geographically separate different
land use types. The availability of land to be developed is also a key ingredient for sprawl.
Several authors have reported that the number of vehicle miles traveled per day per person
increases as the housing density of an area decreases; that is housing density is inversely
proportional to vehicle miles traveled by residents of that community(Frumkin, 2003;
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2001). Travel requirements inherent in
Box 9. EPA Product Highlight
The EPA Office of
Sustainable Communities
produces a semiannual
report on residential
construction trends. The
most recent, in 2012,
compared the location of
new home construction to
the pre-existing land cover to
determine the extent of infill
development in 209 U.S.
metropolitan regions
between 2000 and 2009. The
report paints a detailed
picture of the national trend
towards infill, highlighting
the metropolitan areas
where infill is most and least
common.
30
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
different forms of development can significantly impact ecological health as well as human
health. Specialized land uses, such as residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, have
created a dependence on automobiles just to meet basic needs for employment, schooling,
shopping, and social interactions. The automobile and national highway system, combined
with the post World War II population growth, have accelerated the rate of sprawl and the
emergence of a host of environmental, economic, and social and health.
Negative aspects of sprawl
Sprawl has been reported to accompany almost every unwanted or unattractive aspect of
U.S. urban life. The long list of negatives attributed to sprawl include the following:
air pollution
an increase in extreme heat events
crime
decreased pedestrian safety
destruction of built environment,
destruction of communities
destruction of open space
excess energy use
high taxes
homelessness
income inequality
increased public infrastructure
increased service costs
increased traffic fatalities
inner-city abandonment
loss of biological diversity
loss of farmland
loss of social capital
obesity
overdependence on cars
overreliance on septic systems
poor health
racial segregation
street gangs
urban pests
urban blight
vermin
water pollution
Compiled from: (Baron, et al., 2009; Bullard, 2000; R. Burchell et al., 1998; Duany, et al.,
2000; R. Ewing, Schieber, & Zegeer, 2003; Heimlich & Anderson, 2001; Irwin & Bockstael,
2004; Jackson, 1985; James et al., 2013; Kunstler, 1993; Russ Lopez & Hynes, 2003; National
Research Council, 2009; Northridge & Freeman, 2011; Popenoe, 1979; Speir & Stephenson,
2002; Stone, Hess, & Frumkin, 2010; Tu, Xia, Clarke, & Frei, 2007).
Social Capital and Urban Sprawl
In the context of sprawl and urban communities, social capital refers to diverse measures
of social contact and networking, including frequency of social contact, civic participation,
measures of trust and cooperation, voting, patronage of local businesses.
When viewing trends in urban land use from a systems perspective, "suburbia" emerged as
a new landscape pattern co-incident with a major demographic shift of the more affluent,
professional workers and their families away from urban neighborhoods. Remaining
properties lost value as homeowners were replaced by renters. A downward sociological
spiral took hold that caused many cities to spawn a phenomenon of inner city decay that
became known, at its worst, as "urban blight." As the demographics of metropolitan areas
31
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
shifted to favor those of lesser SES means, the incidence of violence and crime often
increased. New academic disciplines were established (e.g. urban ecology, city and regional
planning, criminology, urban metabolism) to understand the dynamic interplay of social,
economic, and environmental parameters that characterized a growing proportion of the
human landscape.
Negative Ecological Impacts of sprawling urban land forms have been shown to occur by
numerous mechanisms. Sprawl has been positively associated with ( 1) accelerated rates of
land conversion from natural to built environments (Heimlich & Anderson, 2001), (2)
habitat fragmentation (Tscharntke et al., 2012; Wang & Moskovits, 2001) and (3) Disruption
of ecological functions such as primary production, nutrient cycling (Blann, Anderson, Sands,
& Vondracek, 2009), energy flow, decomposition, critical habitat loss for plant and animal
species (Hasse & Lathrop, 2003).
Land cover changes associated with sprawl
Loss of natural land to the built environment can have profound impacts on natural
resource reserves. Worldwide, urban expansion is one of the primary drivers of habitat loss
and acceleration of extinction rates of native plant and animal species (R. I. McDonald, et al.,
2008). Loss of forested land alone may jeopardize the supply of forest products and
associated ecosystem services (Nowak and Walton 2005). A sprawling land use pattern has
been linked to greater loss of carbon storage both above and belowground and a decrease
in net primary productivity (A. Schneider, Logan, &
Kucharik, 2012).
Apart from the loss and fragmentation of
natural landscapes, the alterations associated
with a sprawling urban form include more
impervious surface cover, many irrigated and
fertilized yards, increased use of septic systems
and contamination of subsurface aquifers. The
loss of regional forest reserves and the
increase in non-reflective surfaces such as
roads and rooftops contribute to extreme heat
events (Stone, et al., 2010). Expansion of turf
grass acreage in residential areas alone is
associated with a reduced capacity to adapt to
flooding (A. Schneider, et al., 2012) and a
reduction in the time required for aquifer
recharge. Water quality in watersheds has
been shown to decrease over time as sprawl
progresses. Tu and colleagues (2007) showed
that the impact of urban sprawl on water quality
Box 10. Envision Integrated
Modeling Platform is a GIS-
based framework to create
alternative future scenario
applications. The tool consists of
a dynamic spatial engine and an
open extensible architecture that
allows any number of process
models, evaluative models,
visualizers, and analysis modules.
Together, the framework allows
simulation of land use change
and documentation of resulting
effects on indices of ecosystem,
social, and economic services.
http://envision.bioe. orst. edu/
32
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
comes from the combined effect of population growth and land development.
Infrastructure changes associated with sprawl
Land use policies that allow or encourage extensive development beyond the extent of
water and sewer infrastructure increase the number of households that must rely on well
water and septic systems. Residences within municipal boundaries are typically served by
centralized water treatment and centralized sewage treatment. When residential
development surpasses municipal boundaries, development tends to proceed unabated
into areas without centralized treatment facilities.
Increased use of septic systems raises the risk of sewage backflow and seepage into water
delivery systems, increasing the opportunity for long-standing contamination of drinking
water supplies to go undetected (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012c). The failure
rate of septic systems has been estimated to range from 5 to 30% (T. Schueler, 2000) and
can increase with age of the system.
Impact of sprawl on agriculture and food security
The increased rate of land conversion from agricultural usage to other purposes poses a
realistic threat to food security. With a growing urban population and the trend for
suburban development, which is often at the expense of fertile cropland the proportion of
land surface devoted to agriculture continues to decline (e.g. from 63 percent in 1949 to 51
percent in 2007(ERS, 2011a). Current rates of increase in agricultural productivity will not
compensate for this land loss (Ayres & McCalla, 1996; Francis, et al., 2012).
Gradual declines have occurred in cropland, pasture, and range; grazed forestland has
decreased more rapidly. The conversion of rural land to developed uses tends to be
irreversible and can reduce resilience of systems to perturbations (Sidle, et al., 2013). Over
the past several decades, over half of the land that converted to developed uses was
previously in an agricultural use (ERS, 2011a). Urban and rural residential land acreage
quadrupled from 1945 to 2007, increasing at about twice the rate of population growth
over this period. Land in urban areas was estimated at 61 million acres in 2007, up almost 2
percent since 2002 and 17 percent since 1990 (ERS, 2011a).
33
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Based on data from the National Resources Inventory (NRI) from the 1980s, 46% of land
converted to urban uses came from cropland and pasture (Heimlich & Anderson, 2001). In
the United States, 500,000 hectares are converted away from food and fiber production
each year. It is estimated that, assuming a 1% annual population growth, the land per capita
devoted to food production will be cut in half by 2050, from 0.6 ha per person to 0.3
hectares (Francis, et al., 2012). In North Carolina,
between 1997 and 2011, about 15% of the state's
cropland was lost and employment in the agriculture
industry dropped by over 7% (The Trust for Public
Land, 2011). Research has shown a link between
sprawl and reduced agricultural production
(Eigenbrod, et al., 2011; Francis, et al., 2012).
Agricultural land fell by 45.9 million acres from 1992
to 1997, whereas developed land only increased by
29.9 million acres during the same period (Holcombe
& Staley, 2001). These numbers suggest that
development is unlikely to have been the primary
cause of cropland loss. Moreover, urbanization only
accounted for 26 percent of farmland loss between
1945 and 1992 (Tweeten, 1998). The majority of
land conversion was to recreation, rangeland, forest,
or parkland.
Conversion of farmland to urban use is likely to be
prime farmland (Hasse & Lathrop, 2003; Imhoff et al.,
1997; Munroe & York, 2003). This is at least partly
because the characteristics of land that are essential
for growing high value produce—warm
temperatures in winter, good supply of water, level
land, and well drained soils— are also valued for
urban development (Heimlich & Anderson, 2001).
Furthermore, farmland loss rates are uneven; some states and counties have very elevated
rates of farmland loss. Urbanization may not be the largest contributor to farmland loss
nationally; nonetheless, high conversion rates may impact local agriculture. Preservation of
farmland for future use may help to assure for food security in the future (Tweeten, 1998).
Box 11. EPA Product Highlight
The Integrated Climate and
Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS),
ACE Task 137 (U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency, 2009). The ICLUS is an
online mapping tool developed
that maps US population and
housing density scenarios
through 2100 to create
estimates of the impacts of
climate and land use change
scenarios. Scenarios and
underlying data will be useful
for regional planners, local
governments, state agencies,
non-profit organizations, and
universities interested in long-
range local, statewide, regional
or national analyses.
34
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Urban sprawl is also regarded as a detractor from scenic beauty, habitat integrity, and
continuity of home ranges for fauna and flora (G. S. Anderson & Danielson, 1997; Beier &
Noss, 1998; Ignatieva, Stewart, & Meurk, 2011)
Communities seeking to preserve agricultural la
security, or to maintain a rural aesthetic, severa
These include zoning policies, conservation
measures, transfer of development rights,
and use of compact development forms.
Agricultural conservation reserve zones have
been used to preserve dwindling agricultural
land from development. Also, zoning can
protect agricultural lands to some extent;
however, studies show that the most
significant predictor for the conversion of
agricultural land to urban land is the
combination of the land rent, land
characteristics of slope, productivity, etc.,
and population of the area (York & Munroe,
2010). In general, zoning for the express
purpose of limiting urban expansion or to
offset the loss of agricultural lands has
proven to be ineffective below the county
level (York & Munroe, 2010).
Coordinated action at the regional level,
theoretically, should be effective. Scenario
models to predict land use changes have
shown that agricultural production is reduced
under sprawl and "business as usual"
scenarios when compared to compact
development scenarios. For example, a
model based in Britain showed that loss of
agricultural production was three times as
high under a sprawl scenario as under a
densification scenario (Eigenbrod, et al.,
2011).
Unintended consequences of policies to preserve agricultural land could be
disproportionate adverse effects on minorities and low-socioeconomic groups. Higher rates
of preserved agricultural land have been associated with high incomes and high property
values (Poor & Brule, 2007). This creates a conundrum of which came first. The trend
nd, whether for economic livelihoods, food
I options are available to manage land use.
Box 12. EPA Product Highlight:
The Report on the Environment,
SHC Task 3.4.2, is released every 4
years to describe recent trends in
land use and land cover and to
track changes in several land use
and land condition indicators
including land cover of various
types, ecological condition of
undeveloped land and developed
land relative to population
change.
It is a valuable resource for
researchers, land use planners,
natural resource managers and
policy makers as a resource for
recent national trends in land use,
land cover, and ecological
functioning.
The list of indicators used to track
these trends may be useful to
modelers and sustainability index
developers looking for standard
metrics with documented data
sources.
35
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
implies that when agricultural conservation policies are implemented, low socio-economic
residents are displaced. An alternative explanation is that residents of higher income areas
value conservation more highly that lower SES population.
If the results are merely descriptive of the existing demographic, then preservation of
agricultural land in lower income communities may be a cost-effective way to maintain food
security before an area becomes gentrified (Warren, Ryan, Lerman, & Tooke, 2011).
Not considered in this review is the interplay between loss of agricultural land versus
improved agricultural productivity on poor quality land or the influence of international
markets on food supply in this country. If external food resources become less costly and of
equal quality, domestic markets will move to international sources. This dynamic is also
likely to prevail if landowners receive more for their land when sold for development than
can be received for agricultural productivity.
Physical fitness, transportation and sprawl
Impacts of sprawl on both human health and ecological services are documented for a
variety of endpoints. These endpoints include physical and mental health, safety, exposure
to environmental pollution, and consequences for social capital. Social capital includes such
intangibles as aesthetics, spirituality, social networks, and neighborhood identity. Residents
of communities characterized by high population density, mixed land use, and by spatial
connectivity to other communities, report greater reliance on walking and cycling to get
around when compared to residents living in low-density, isolated neighborhoods devoted
to single purpose land use (Saelens, Sallis, & Frank, 2003).
Obesity and Sprawl. Obesity in the United States is at a historic high, to the extent that it's
been described as an epidemic. A link between obesity and urban sprawl is well
documented in the literature. Physical inactivity is positively correlated with sprawling
urban form; obesity is also positively correlated with lack of walkable urban space.
Sprawling urban form fosters high reliance on driving but not on walking to get around
(Frumkin, 2003; United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2001). Studies have also
shown a greater incidence of hypertension (R. Ewing, Schmid, Killingsworth, Zlot, &
Raudenbush, 2003), higher body weight or BMI (Reid Ewing, et al., 2003; James, et al., 2013;
James et al., 2009; Joshu, Boehmer, Brownson, & Ewing, 2008; R. Lopez, 2004; Seliske,
Pickett, & Janssen, 2012; Slater et al., 2010; Z. Zhao & Kaestner, 2010) in suburban
communities than was evident in reference groups. Numerous community studies have
confirmed that communities designed to promote physical activity are successful in doing
so (Sivam, Karuppannan, Koohsari, & Sivam, 2012) and thus can promote a healthier life
style. Not all studies are so straightforward, Griffin et al. (2013) showed a higher probability
of coronary heart disease or myocardial infarction in women associated with greater
physical activity.
36
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Compact urban form has been associated with less sports participation among youths
(Slater, et al., 2010). A lack of statistical rigor and the presence of multiple confounding
factors have yielded equivocal results for many studies in the literature (Doyle, Kelly-
Schwartz, Schlossberg, & Stockard, 2006). One such confounding factor is the perception of
safety, which is a very strong predictor of walking. Attempts to control for safety did not
resolve associations between walkability and weight (Doyle, et al., 2006). Other
neighborhood characteristics such as traffic, unleashed dogs and personal limitations such
as injury and lack of free time can obfuscate results (Joshu, et al., 2008).
Rural Sprawl. Sprawl is not restricted to urban development; rural communities can also
display both sprawling and compact development forms. Rural residents can just as easily
be affected by the negative health impacts of an automobile-dependent development
patterns.
Among rural populations showing elevated incidence of obesity, patterns of land use
development and automobile use were again implicated as contributing factors (Dalbey,
2008). Compact, walkable, mixed-use, rural communities have been recommended to
support and encourage active life styles. Reliance on the automobile for multiple daily trips,
including commuting, transport to schools, shops, civic and cultural amenities, and
recreation was seen as contributing to unhealthy lifestyles that can be remedied in part by
compact community design.
Air quality, water quality, and sprawl
This reliance on the automobile has resulted in another category of health concerns.
Automobile use results in the creation of a variety of air pollutants, both gases and
particulates, that vary from region to region, season of the year, time of day, as well as with
the properties of fuel used.
Another potential health impact from sprawl is the increased use of septic tanks and wells.
Improperly treated sewage can pollute waterways, beaches, and recreational waters.
Sewage concentrations in recreational waters have been found to increase the risk of
swimming associated gastrointestinal illness, especially in children under 10 years of age
(Wade et al., 2008).
Well water can be a danger to rural households if there is groundwater contamination in
the area, which is common particularly during wet weather conditions. Schueler (2000)
concluded that even minimal development in a watershed leads to almost inevitable
violation of bacterial water quality standards during 37 very wet as well as during very dry
weather. The author highlighted studies showing 30-60% of shallow wells in Maryland had
detectable levels of fecal coliform, fecal contamination was more likely on properties with
septic systems (ibid). Bacterial contamination comes from a variety of sources including
farmland, failing septic systems, sewer overflows, and illicit connections to storm sewers, as
well as nonhuman bacterial sources (birds, domestic animals, and pets).
37
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Environmental justice and sprawl
Certain land use regulations associated with a sprawling development pattern may
disproportionately impact on the poor populations. Zoning codes that require large
minimum residential lot sizes are commonly referred to as exclusionary zoning. This
appellation reflects the effectiveness of ordinances in pricing out lower income residents. In
this way, sprawl has the capacity to exacerbate economic segregation, which is discussed
further under the section on residential land use.
Infrastructure costs and sprawl
A dispersed development pattern impacts water and sewer costs. Water and sewer
infrastructure costs for compact, contiguous development patterns are only 60-66% what
they are for more dispersed patterns (Speir & Stephenson, 2002). Larger lot sizes, more
disperse lots, and longer distances all increase water and sewer service and infrastructure
costs independently and cumulatively, though they are most sensitive to lot sizes. Doubling
lot sizes increases water and sewer costs by 30% on average (Speir & Stephenson, 2002).
Subsequently, residents in more compact areas of a municipality may be subsidizing the
infrastructure and service costs of those in more suburban areas, through both taxes for the
initial infrastructure investment, and then through utility fees, which are often averaged
over an entire region (Speir & Stephenson, 2002).
Affordability and sprawl
Sprawling residential areas are generally associated with lower housing costs and higher
transportation costs than compact areas. Although housing tends to be more expensive in
compact areas (Burton, 2000), the total costs of housing and transportation must be
considered to gain a true picture of affordability. There is a tradeoff between these costs
and whether one cost offsets the other varies by region and circumstance. On average
however, research has shown that for every dollar a household saves on housing, it spends
$0.77 more on transportation (Roberto, 2008). This only hold true up to a certain threshold
however; transportation costs usually outweigh the housing savings for a commute longer
than 12-15 miles (ibid).
Furthermore, sprawl separates people from employment centers. For the poor,
employment may be hard to reach because of inability to find or afford essential
transportation to jobs (Center for Neighborhood, 2012; Roberto, 2008). For more discussion
of housing and transportation affordability, see the Regional accessibility and Regional
density sections of this paper.
Quantitative relations for sprawl
• Doubling lot sizes increases water and sewer costs by 30% on average (Speir &
Stephenson, 2002).
• In small communities in America, over 60% of households rely on septic systems for
waste disposal (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012c).
38
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Expansion of turf grass acreage in residential areas alone is associated with a
reduced capacity to adapt to flooding (projected increases in U.S. Corn Belt will lead
to between 15-48% increase in runoff) (A. Schneider, et al., 2012)
• Losses of agricultural production are over three times as high in sprawl scenarios
compared to densification scenarios in growth projections (Eigenbrod et al. 2011,
Francis et al. 2012).
• 60% of development on farmland took place on prime farmland in New Jersey (while
only 53% of farmland is 'prime') (Hasse and Lathrop, 2003).
3.1.3 Shrinking towns and cities
What is considered a rural community? There are many ways to describe rural communities
based on their economic, geographic, or design characteristics. Certainly, each community
is unique, and rural communities can include a number of complex and contradictory
qualities. However, characterizing them can help identify common challenges they may be
facing as well as opportunities that may help them adopt a sustainable approach to growth
and development in the future. Most rural communities can be grouped into five categories,
though many may fall into more than one: (1) Gateway communities, (2) Resource-
dependent communities, (3) Edge communities, (4) Traditional Main Street, and (5) Second
home and retirement communities (International City/County Management Association,
2010). Alternately, communities can also be characterized quantitatively by their
population. Small population size typically characterizes a rural place with population
thresholds used to differentiate rural and urban communities ranging from 2,500 up to
50,000 people. Researchers and others who analyze conditions in "rural" America most
often use data on nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) areas, defined by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), on the basis of counties where population and economic trends can be
tracked.
Recent studies have shown that the face of declining cities and regions is no longer
primarily limited to older manufacturing towns, urban cores, and declining rural farming
communities. As a result of economic downturns, in particular housing foreclosures across
the nation, suburban areas experienced the greatest decline (42.8%) in housing occupancy
during the period of 2006-2009 of economic downturn than the previous 2000-2006
housing boom period as compared to rural (13.8%) followed by urban areas with the
smallest decrease (1.9%) (J. Hollander, Polsky, Zinderr, & Runfola, 2011). Regionally, the
Sunbelt area (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay, New Orleans and the
outskirts of Florida's coastal cities) showed noticeable increases in declining housing, where
massive new housing developments are largely unoccupied while older housing is
abandoned due to foreclosure akin to those observed in former industrial Rustbelt cities. In
addition, the upper Midwestern states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Northern Illinois and
Minnesota) exhibited a similar decline. In contrast, the Great Plains, Mississippi River
39
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
corridor, western Pennsylvania, and Pacific Northwest was either less pronounced or
reversed (J. Hollander, et al., 2011).
Rural population loss
Population loss is a longstanding concern among rural development practitioners, and one
that goes hand in hand with urbanization. Nearly half of today's nonmetropolitan counties
lost population through net out migration over the past 20 years; for over 700 counties
(over a third of non-metro counties), this loss has exceeded 10 percent (ERS, 2011b). In July
2011, non-metro America had just over 51 million residents, over the last decade, a 4.5-
percent increase in the non-metro population, less than half the metro rate. However,
populations declined in most rural and isolated counties within the non-metro areas, while
rising moderately in more urban counties. In fact, many of the fast-growing non-metro
towns have been reclassified as metro or became part of existing metro areas through
suburban expansion. Today, non-metro areas contain 16 percent of the U.S. population
distributed across 75 percent of the land area, compared with 21 percent of the population
(and over 80 percent of the land area) in 1990 (ibid).
Local economic impacts in shrinking towns
Population loss tends to increase tax burdens, reduce property values, and reduce both the
demand for and supply of local goods and services. Rural outmigration is also troublesome
because it is highly concentrated among young adults, especially those possessing or
acquiring education and skills. In general, young adults leave rural areas to attend college,
serve in the military, or see the world. Rural areas gain population through the in-migration
of young families, midlife career changers, and retirees.
Some of these counties have had very high poverty rates, substantial loss in manufacturing
jobs, and high unemployment. Lack of economic opportunity was likely a major factor in
their high outmigration. Most high net outmigration counties, however, are relatively
prosperous, with low unemployment rates, low high school dropout rates, and average
household incomes. For these counties, low population density and less appealing
landscapes distinguish them from other non-metro counties. Both types of outmigration
counties stand out on two measures, indicating that quality-of-life factors inhibit in-
migration: a lack of retirees moving in and local manufacturers citing the area's
unattractiveness as a problem in recruiting managers and professionals (ERS, 2010).
Which areas are most vulnerable?
Rural businesses and industries often specialize in resource based activities such as
agriculture, forestry, mining, or natural amenity-based recreation. In addition,
manufacturing establishments-some involved in processing food, wood and mining
products, but most in activities unrelated to local natural resources-have been a key part of
many rural economies. Furthermore, U.S. rural areas have been disproportionately affected
40
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
by the loss of textile and apparel jobs, particularly in the Southeast, where textile and
apparel plants were concentrated (ERS, 2006).
Rural (non-metro) industry employment earnings underwent major changes between 2001
and 2010. Although farming, forestry, and fishing inflation-adjusted earnings were together
nearly 14 percent higher in 2010 than in 2001, this disguises estimated declines of about 30
percent in both forestry and fishing, hidden by a 22 percent gain in farm earnings. Mining,
which had been shedding jobs and earnings in recent decades, experienced a substantial
increase in earnings (45%), due largely to growth of natural gas extraction from
unconventional sources, particularly from shale. In addition, earnings grew substantially in
health and educational services and government over this period (35% all rural earnings in
2010) (ERS, 2011b).
Future population shifts
The future could see additional migratory shifts. Members of the baby boom cohort, now in
the mid-forties to mid-sixties, are approaching a period in their lives when moves to rural
and small-town destinations increase. Non-metropolitan counties are likely to experience
the greatest surge in baby boom migration during 2000-20. People reaching their fifties and
sixties have a significant propensity to migrate to non-metro counties with more isolated
settings, especially those with high natural and urban amenities and lower housing costs. If
baby boomers follow past migration patterns, the non-metro population age 55-75 will
increase by 30 percent between now and 2020 (ERS, 2009).
Best Practices and Unintended Consequences
Communities with declining populations or a contracting economy face a combination of
problems: unemployment and poverty, increasing demands for social services with fewer
dollars to pay for them, an aging workforce, vacant properties, and loss of historic
structures. Attempts to compete with other jurisdictions for large economic development
projects, such as new manufacturing plants, office parks, or regional big box retailers, may
come at the expense of local businesses and the communities they aim to support
(International City/County Management Association, 2010).
Although shrinking towns and cities do not necessarily have lower neighborhood quality (J.
B. Hollander, 2011), significant population loss does lead to more vacant properties, which
is a challenge for community planners. The literature emphasizes several tools and
processes to address this challenge including land banking (Joseph Schilling & Logan, 2008),
adaptive reuse, multi-purpose infrastructure, and consolidation of redundant programs
(Fugate et al., 2007). This process is referred to as 'right sizing' or 'smart decline' rather than
smart growth and encourages municipalities to focus on improving the quality of life of
remaining residents, rather than trying to grow (J. B. Hollander & Nemeth, 2011).
41
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Box 13. EPA Product Highlight
Maximizing the Utility of Vacant Land (MURL) is a structured decision-making
approach that was developed in support of the City of Cleveland and US EPA
Region 5. It is intended to allow community involvement in an open-source,
web-based, GIS-linked platform for considering and evaluating options for the
re-use of vacant land.
Cleveland is one of many US cities facing a declining population, a reduced tax
base, and an expanding inventory of foreclosed and abandoned properties.
Land Banks have been used to transfer ownership of these properties to the City
or County, with the intent of reusing or repurposing them. A wide range of
options exist, including simple yard expansions for a neighboring property.
Where multiple, contiguous properties become owned by a Land Bank, an
opportunity exists to consolidate and develop a larger parcel toward a new use,
such as a park or community garden.
To support these types of decisions for the reuse of land, a Structured Decision
Making (SDM) tool was developed and tailored to the site to elucidate
fundamental and strategic objectives for the reuse of vacant land. The resulting
data is displayed in an interactive, on-line tool (CLEMURL.ORG , which also
provides a freely available toolkit for developing a similar platform.
http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cate/vol6/issl/ll/
42
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3.2 Influence of Land Use Form and Development on Sustainability
3.2.1 Density
Moderately high population density is widely promoted by planners and smart growth
advocates for its putative benefits, which include a smaller footprint of developed land,
preservation of agricultural land and open space, less driving, more walking, support for
transit systems, and greater opportunity for social interaction. Evidence supports many of
these benefits; however, increasingly it appears that density alone is not the critical factor.
Instead other elements of urban form influence these outcomes. Recent research suggests
that population density, as an isolated factor, has a much smaller impact on travel behavior
than once assumed. Job density and centrality, destination accessibility, transit accessibility,
and design factors such as intersection density have a larger impact. Drawbacks to higher
density include increases in local air pollution, traffic congestion, and allergen concentration.
At the neighborhood scale, density is a necessary, but not sufficient element of sustainable
urban form. Literature in the early 2000s used density as a key metric; more recently
density is one of a bundle of neighborhood attributes along with intersection density,
walkable features, and mixed uses. Loose associations have been noted between density
and driving (less driving), walking (more walking), traffic safety (for vehicles and
pedestrians), and psychological depression (fewer symptoms)
Although most of the research on density at the neighborhood scale focuses on the urban
environment, compact design has been proposed as a valuable strategy for rural towns as
well. Bounding rural growth to produce denser villages, also known as "cluster development"
or "conservation development" may conserve agricultural land, open space, plus minimize
exposure to pesticides (California Governor's Office of Planning and Research, 2010;
International City/County Management Association, 2010). Advocates point out that
clustered rural development preserves small town charm and contributes to lively social
spaces when compared to scattered development along highway routes. Clustering rural
development has been reported to reduce impervious surfaces by 10-15% (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 2001).
Potential advantages and disadvantages of cluster development are speculative due to a
lack of documentation in the published literature. We address this topic further in Section
6.1 on Decision Science and Land Use Practices section of this report.
Transportation behavior
Urban form, which is shaped by density, is inextricably tied to transportation infrastructure.
Essentially, investments in public transit infrastructure allow for greater density of
development. Density supports mixed uses, which contributes to the success of public
transit and also encourages walking (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b; T. Litman & Steele, 2012).
43
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Yet, the establishment of successful, cost-effective public transit requires a minimum
threshold of density. The Center for Transit-Oriented Development has identified an
absolute minimum of 10 housing units per acre; residential densities of at least 30 units per
acre are optimal (Haas, 2010).
Once density thresholds are reached, feedback loops then contribute positively to the
development of a robust public transit system and an urban form that supports alternative
types of transportation as well. Neighborhoods with a bundle of characteristics including
walkability, density, a mix of uses, and transit accessibility have been shown to increase
transit use among residents (Mumford, Contant, Weissman, Wolf, & Glanz, 2011; Wood,
Frank, & Giles-Corti, 2010) and decrease driving (T. Litman & Steele, 2012).
Neighborhoods meeting these criteria tend to be either older, renovated areas near a town
or city center, or a new developments designed to conform to a sustainable development
pattern such as traditional neighborhood design (TND), transit-oriented development (TOD),
new urbanism, or smart growth. Residents of compact neighborhoods may drive from 5% to
15% less than residents in lower density, more auto dependent locations (T. Litman & Steele,
2012). A neighborhood, city, or town not meeting this threshold is unlikely to successfully
launch or sustain public transit.
Energy Use
An inverse correlation of population density with energy consumption for transportation
was initially proposed in a 1989 study by Newman and Kenworthy. Gasoline consumption
per capita was related to population density in 32 cities worldwide. A 2004 reanalysis of the
Newman and Kenworthy data, failed to corroborate the proposed correlation between
overall transportation energy consumption and population density, whether measured for
the Central Business District (CBD), outer area, or for the whole of the region (Mindali,
Raveh, & Salomon, 2004). Subsequent studies based on national data report a marginal
association; whereas, a 1996 meta-analysis by the Transportation Research Board reported
a 10% increase in density correlated with a 0.5 to 1.0% decrease in VMT as an isolated
factor (Transportation Research Board, 1996).
Several meta-analyses confirm that job density, destination distance, transit accessibility,
and intersection density all exert a more powerful influence on energy consumption for
transportation than population density. These studies show a reduction in VMT of up to
40% when population density, centralization, and high employment are present (X. Y. Cao,
Mokhtarian, & Handy, 2006; R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b; T. Litman & Steele, 2012; Su, 2011).
Air Quality
The effect of population density on air quality has been studied at a regional scale. GHG
emissions in denser areas may be lower per capita due to reduced driving and other
efficiencies of urban infrastructure (M. Alberti et al., 2007; VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007).
GHG emissions may also be significantly lower in densely populated cities than in the
44
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
suburbs. For individuals, however, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide
concentrations, and therefore exposures, are higher (Alberti et al., 2007).
Most estimates of GHG emissions are based on local emission data which may be useful for
evaluating local exposures and potential health effects, but less relevant to climate effects.
Cities with heavy manufacturing show high contributions to GHGs, whereas the cities where
these manufactured products are consumed show low contributions. When a carbon
footprint is adjusted to incorporate consumption and resident air dispersal in addition to
emissions dense, prosperous cities produce a bigger footprint. The effect has been
attributed to prosperity, not to density. The higher standard of living of city residents leads
to higher consumption and produces a larger carbon footprint (Heinonen, Kyro, & Junnila,
2011).
Health impacts of density
The social and health consequences of population density are not as commonly studied as
are the impacts of density on transportation and the environment. Nonetheless, density has
been shown to improve traffic safety—for both vehicles and pedestrians—when compared
to sprawling neighborhoods (R. Ewing, R. A. Schieber, et al., 2003). Density is correlated
with higher auto emissions at a local scale (Melia, Parkhurst, & Barton, 2011), more traffic
congestion (Sarzynski, Wolman, Galster, & Hanson, 2006), and in some areas, higher levels
of allergen (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007).
Social capital and density
Does crowding have adverse effects on human well-being? Crowded living in high-rise,
multi-family housing has been associated with distress (Evans, Wells, & Moch, 2003) and
aggression (A. L. Dannenberg, Frumkin, H., & Jackson, R. J., 2011). Sullivan and Chang
(in Dannenberg et al, 2011) make a distinction between social density and spatial density.
Social density is associated with negative psychological outcomes, whereas spatial density is
not.
Social density is typically measured by the number of people per room in a dwelling.
Although there is no consensus on the level at which a dwelling becomes too crowded,
crowding is generally determined by factors including individual needs for refuge and for
coordination of household activities. It is therefore no surprise that negative effects of
crowding are more often experienced by low-income individuals (Evans, et al., 2003). One
study found a correlation between social density and neuroses beginning at the threshold of
1.5 persons per room in a dwelling (Evans, et al., 2003). The denser neighborhoods in the
study relating density with symptoms of depression were still only moderately dense, with
less than 12 units per acre. Efficient use of land to avoid crowding is best accomplished
ensuring a minimum of personal space rather than developing larger lots.
Evidence suggests that more densely populated neighborhoods have high ratings for social
sustainability which is defined by access to services, affordability, social interaction, pride in
45
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
the neighborhood, and civic participation (Bramley, Dempsey, Power, Brown, & Watkins,
2009).
Another benefit of dense neighborhood development appears to be fewer symptoms of
depression in residents (Miles, Coutts, & Mohamadi, 2012). This last association may be
due to more opportunity for human interaction in denser neighborhoods. However,
residents of equally dense areas were found to have more depressive symptoms when auto
commuters were high (ibid).
Equity and density
Dense urban form may have consequences for environmental justice when compared to
less dense urban forms. A review of social equity impacts of density in English cities
indicated that denser areas improved quality of life for low-income residents Positive
aspects were attributed to less segregation and better access to transit (Burton, 2000).
However a lack of affordable housing and reduced living space were clear disadvantages.
The authors reported weak evidence to support a positive connection between density,
access to public services, green space, or jobs.
Diversity and density
Residential density has a complex relationship with diversity. While cities as a whole tend to
be diverse places (Talen, 2008), this diversity tends to be in the form of socioeconomically
segregated enclaves (Pendall & Carruthers, 2003). An analysis of U.S. metropolitan areas
revealed that segregation is lowest in very low density areas, rises in moderate density
areas (between about 12 and 14 people per acre), and drops again at the highest densities
(ibid). So though traditional neighborhood design (TND) areas, which are denser than typical
suburbs, are positively perceived by residents as having more diversity (Lovejoy, Handy, &
Mokhtarian, 2010), this may not necessarily be the case in reality.
Obesity, physical activity, and density
Finally, density, as an independent factor, is not associated with obesity or BMI. Combating
the public health crisis of obesity and physical inactivity is a national priority and has
spurred a significant amount of research on how land use and the urban form contribute to
the issue. While there is evidence that land use patterns can significantly affect obesity and
physical activity, density alone cannot. A number of studies report no association or only a
very small negative association between dense neighborhoods and BMI (R. Lopez, 2004; K.
N. McDonald, Oakes, & Forsyth, 2012; Slater, et al., 2010). Similarly, there is no association
between density and walking or physical activity (Oakes, Forsyth, & Schmitz, 2007). Dense
living may even decrease youth sports participation (Slater et al., 2010). This last association
may have more to do with a dearth of recreational facilities than with density in and of itself.
Density, Agglomeration, and Creativity
Cities may foster "agglomeration" efficiencies that allow for the easy sharing of ideas,
information, and technology (Muro & Puentes, 2004). Some evidence for this phenomenon
46
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
exists, as when average labor productivity increases with increasing employment density of
counties (Robert Cervero, 2001; R. Ewing, et al., 2001). It has also been hypothesized that
the proximity that comes with density spurs innovation. Innovation in this context is
typically measured with the proxy of patents per unit area. Research has found a positive
correlation between density of creative workers and patenting activity, though not with
density alone (Knudsen, Florida, Stolarick, & Gates, 2008). This effect is still under debate,
as causal connections have not yet been shown. Other researchers contend that creative
workers follow jobs, and the connection between innovation and density is more a factor of
the economics and geography of production (Storper, 2009). Further research will help to
elucidate this complex emerging field of study.
Financial implications of dense community development
Denser, compact, contiguous development can be cost effective because of reduced costs
of infrastructure construction and maintenance (Robert W. Burchell, 2002). This is borne
out in numerous studies. Savings have been shown for infrastructure of water, sewer, road
and other public services. Studies on this issue typically fall into one of three types:
• Cost and revenue comparisons of specific developments. These studies calculate the
infrastructure costs and tax revenue per acre for a given development for
comparison across developments.
In addition to savings on infrastructure and service costs, municipalities may accrue
higher tax revenue from increased population and business density. For example,
Sarasota, FL, on a per acre basis, dense mixed-use development garnered between 4
and 54 times more revenue per acre than a typical strip mall style development
(Katz, 2010). A 1989 study by the Urban Land Institute found that a home on a 1/3
acre lot 10 miles from downtown cost taxpayers twice as much as a comparable
home on a compact lot near downtown (J. E. Frank, 1989). More recent studies
financed by Smart Growth America found that New Urbanist greenfield and infill
developments cost about 38% less in upfront infrastructure, have between 10 and
19% lower per unit service costs, and generate between 7 and 10 times higher net
revenues per unit than conventional suburban developments (Strategic Economics,
2013). Mixed-use infill, in particular, generated much higher net revenues, around
1,150 times more.
• Projections of business as usual (BAU) vs. Smart Growth scenarios. These studies
consider how a change in development pattern will affect infrastructure costs.
Results vary depending on the location and specific assumptions, but they almost
always show the smart growth scenario saves money.
47
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
For example, the Maryland Planning Department commissioned a study to estimate
infrastructure expenditures for a projected smart growth scenario and a business as
usual (BAU) scenario. The report concluded that a smart growth scenario would
increase the average density from 1 unit per acre to 2.67 units per acre, would save
the county more than 30% in infrastructure expenditures. Project new road
construction miles would be decreased by 274% (AKRF Inc, 2011).
Similarly, a model based in Kane County, Illinois, compared the costs of high- density
and low-density development. For all four categories of costs considered, high
density development was found to be the least costly: developmental cost,
individual costs (including property taxes), communal costs (such as roadway
maintenance), and social costs (externalities such as air pollution) (Deal & Schunk,
2004).The development density effect was greatest for projected communal costs,
which were 98% higher for low density development at the end of the 28-year
simulation, and on societal costs, which were also 28% higher for low density
development. Multiple projections over 25 to 30 years have shown similar results
(Chang, H.C. Planning Consultants, & Planimetries, 1999; Muro & Puentes, 2004).
The Brookings Institution reported that smart growth patterns over a period of 25
years could save governments 11.8% on road building costs, 6% on water and sewer
costs, and 3.7% on annual operations and service delivery (Muro & Puentes, 2004).
• Cost-of-community-services studies. These studies determine the costs of
community services and infrastructure on the basis of land uses, land use patterns,
and other factors to calculate an expense-to-tax revenue ratio. A study of 247
counties using 1985 data initially reported that higher density counties had higher
per capita infrastructure expenditures (Ladd, 1992); however, more recent studies
report contradictory findings. A more recent meta-analysis of 125 such studies
found no statistically significant relation between density and overall cost of
community services (Kotchen & Schulte, 2009). For similar types of studies, reports
of revenues per acre proved a more useful metric for informing community
decisions on land use (Strategic Economics, 2013).
Quantitative relations for density
• When household or population density is considered in isolation, a 1% change in
density is associated with a mere 0.07% increase in transit use, 0.07% increase in
walking, and a 0.04% decrease in VMT (Ewing & Cervero, 2010)
• A 1% increase in intersection density is associated with a 0.23% increase in transit
use, a 0.39% increase in walking, and a 0.12% decrease in VMT (Ewing & Cervero,
2010)
• Residents in compact neighborhoods may drive from 5% to 15% less than residents
drive in lower density, more auto-dependent locations (Litman, 2012).
48
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Reductions in VMT of up to 40% have been achieved through integrated smart
growth programs that combine density, centralization, and high jobs to housing
balance ratios (Litman 2012).
• Optimal density for social sustainability (based on a composite measure of equity,
social engagement, and neighborhood satisfaction) occurred around 40-units-per-
acre in England (Bramley, et al., 2009)
• The relation between density and segregation follows an inverted u-shaped curve,
with segregation peaking between about 12 to 14 people per acre, and dropping
again at the highest densities (Pendall & Carruthers, 2003).
• The ratio of all public service expenditures to tax revenues is not significantly
correlated with density (Kotchen & Schulte, 2009); however, revenue-per-acre is a
function of density and mix of uses.
Best practices and unintended consequences
When conceptualizing density rural and suburban versus Manhattan-style city centers are
extremes. An emerging consensus in the planning profession that moderate density
appropriate to the context, combined with good design along a gradient, are optimal for
density. VMT and transit use, to forest fragmentation and social cohesion, the development
pattern is shown to be more impactful than development density alone.
When constructed in an aesthetically pleasing manner with access to nearby parks,
residential density up to 36 units/acre has been shown to be acceptable to homebuyers
even though the standard suburban density is only 2 to 4 units per acre. Aesthetically
pleasing here refers to the inclusion of green infrastructure, mixed uses, and walkability
features. (Robert Cervero & Bosselmann, 1994).
For comparison, a study in England reported that the optimal density for social capital was
significantly higher at 40 units per acre although neighborhood pride and community
attachment peaked at lower densities (Bramley et al., 2009).
A possible unintended consequence of higher population densities is the associated
increase in impervious surface cover. Although impervious surfaces may increase locally,
increased density may divert development from greenfields, contributing to increases in
overall levels of greenspace and lessening of pervious surfaces regionally.
3.2.2 Mixed-uses
Mixed-use design refers to zoning and development for a variety of uses, typically
residential, civic, commercial, recreational, and retail. Mixed use does mean mixing
industrial facilities with residential and other civic uses.
Evidence presented below supports the assertion that mixed-use developments are
associated with a reduction in driving, an increase in walking for transportation and physical
activity and, anecdotally, an increase in neighborhood vitality.
49
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Mixed uses and driving
Mixed land uses are consistently associated with a decrease in driving, as measured by
either VMT or kcal of fuel burned (R. Ewing et al., 2011; L. D. Frank, Greenwald, Winkelman,
Chapman, & Kavage, 2010). In addition, an increase in transit use is promoted by transit-
oriented development (TOD). This concept advocates mixed-use and ready access (within %
mile) to one or more transit hubs (Mumford, et al., 2011).
Physical activity and mixed-uses
Mixed land uses are consistently associated with an increase in walking for transportation
(Duncan et al., 2010), plus an increase in overall physical activity (H. E. Christian et al., 2011;
Kerr, Frank, Sallis, & Chapman, 2007; Lovasi et al., 2011; Mumford, et al., 2011; Troped,
Tamura, Whitcomb, & Laden, 2011). A statistically significant link between walking and BMI
has not been demonstrated (Brown et al., 2009); speculation on the reasons have been
presented (Chatman, 2008).
Market research indicates unmet demand for compact, mixed-use developments (Carnoske,
et al., 2010; Jonathan Levine & Frank, 2007). In a study based in Atlanta, 70% of the
surveyed group expressed preferences for transit and pedestrian friendly environments,
and this group was much more likely to want a change from their current neighborhood
than those who preferred auto-oriented neighborhoods (Carnoske, et al., 2010).
It can be difficult to isolate the effects of mixed-uses alone, as many studies compare
neighborhoods with a bundle of traits such as mixed-use, walkable, transit-oriented, and
compact compared to dispersed, car dependent, and single-use. More benefits are
associated with a subset of mixed-use developments termed Transit-oriented development
(TOD). Residents who live in TOD locations near to light rail stops have been found to have
lower (Brown et al., 2009).
Counter intuitively, mixed land use adjacent to parks has been associated with lower park,
which may reflect traffic safety concerns from busy streets or the inability to account for
walkability as a factor (Kaczynski, Johnson, & Saelens, 2010).
Diversity of activity
Some experts, notably the late Jane Jacobs, promote "diversity of activity" as a more
inclusive goal than mixed-use alone, and one that encourages lively and thriving places. This
concept typically includes promoting gradual redevelopment to achieve a diversity of
housing types, building densities, household sizes, ages, cultures, and incomes. Research
based in Chicago provides evidence that a diversity of housing age is positively associated
with multiple measures of neighborly social relations (K. King, 2013). There is also evidence
to conclude that various methods of increasing income diversity in neighborhoods,
including through rental vouchers, increases household safety for voucher recipients, as
measured by exposure to crimes against person and property (L. M. Anderson et al., 2003).
At the same time, increasing income diversity can be challenging. Incentivizing higher
50
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
income households to live in areas dominated by lower income households can lead to
gentrification, where lower income households are priced out of the neighborhood.
However providing vouchers or rent controlled housing options in higher income
neighborhoods is often met with resistance by local residents.
Economic return of mixed-uses
While much research exists to support economic impacts of developments considered
smart growth, walkable, or compact on measures such as retail revenue and infrastructure
costs, fewer were found through this literature search that have looked at the effects of
mixed-use controlling for other potentially influential variables. Research comparing per-
acre-revenue generation of a variety of land uses in Sarasota County, Florida indicated that
that mixed use developments performed dramatically better than residential, commercial,
or big box retail stores in isolation. On a per- acre basis, two mixed-use developments
brought in from 94 to 142 times the property tax revenue of the local Walmart (Katz, 2010).
Increased revenues combined with reduced infrastructure costs for mixed use
developments contribute to shorter recovery times for initial investments.
Quantitative relations for mixed-uses
• Residents of mixed-use developments drive from 5% tol5% less than residents of
single-use neighborhoods (Litman, 2012)
• A 1% increase in the jobs to housing rations leads to a 0.19% increase in walking and
a 1% increase in mixed-uses leads to a .15% increase in walking for transportation (R.
Ewing & Cervero, 2010b)
• Residents of TOD neighborhoods with nearby light rail stops have lower BMIs
(Brown et al., 2009)
Best practices and unintended consequences
Many municipal and county planning departments and non-profit organizations are
promoting mixed-uses in support of lively, safe, walkable communities. Examples include
the EPA Office of Smart Growth, the Urban Land Institute, the Smart Growth Network, and
the Congress for the New Urbanism and The Bay Area Council in San Francisco (National
Association of Local Government Environmental & Smart Growth Leadership, 2004).
Multiple market feasibility studies indicate that market trends for mixed-use, walkable yield
good returns on investments (ibid). Carnoske, et al., (2010) observed that developers
sometimes created barriers to more compact, mixed use, residential developments despite
growing demand among home buyers, perhaps because of not being attuned market shifts.
(Carnoske, et al., 2010).
51
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Growing evidence suggests that a mix of uses combined with other features supportive of
walking ,(e.g., safe streets, small blocks, and connected street networks) is promotes
benefits in social capital and health (Kaczynski, et al., 2010).
Current studies of the build environment are addressing the impacts of mixing residential,
employment, and retail uses, as well as housing types and community services(e.g.,
libraries, museums, and parks), and diversity of race, income, and age (Talen, 2008).
3.2.3 Transit-oriented development
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
refers to neighborhoods planned for
dense development patterns around a
public transit hub. This arrangement is
promoted to reduce reliance on
automobile use for local trips. TODs are
intended to provide transportation
options for residents, reduce emissions
from automobiles, and decrease traffic
congestion. Transit-adjacent
development is another approach to
accomplish these goals. Both approaches
are recognized as potentially useful to
stimulate economic development and to
encourage affordable housing for several
demographic groups. (Jacobson &
Forsyth, 2008).
Transit-oriented developments may also
encourage walking. (Freeland, Banerjee,
Dannenberg, & Wendel, 2013; Lachapelle,
Frank, Saelens, Sallis, & Conway, 2011).
The inherent benefits of dense, mixed-
use, may be a function of the people who
chose to live in such neighborhoods, a
phenomenon addressed a number of researchers (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010a; Lawrence
Frank, Bradley, Kavage, Chapman, & Lawton, 2008a).
The potential for TODs to ease the cost of central city housing through lower transportation
costs has been recognized(Kitamura, 2009) as well as the potential effectiveness of
transportation-based and non-transportation-based development incentives to encourage
TOD(Polzin, 1999).
Box 14. SHC Product Highlight
A report that will provide
production functions of ecosystem
goods and services for two
different neighborhood-scale
development scenarios is currently
being developed as part of the
Tampa Bay Ecosystem Services
Demonstration Project (SHC Task
2.1.4.1). One of these scenarios is
that of a suburban-style
development pattern with ample
greenspace; the other scenario is
that of a highly walkable
neighborhood built in the fashion
of older urban areas.
This report may provide useful
insights regarding the ecological
benefits and costs of Transit-
Oriented Development and other
neighborhood-scale development
schemes.
52
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Quantitative relations for TOD
• A synthesis of 14 travel-behavior studies reported that if a neighborhood's density is
doubled and all else is kept constant, per capita vehicle trips per capita Vehicle Miles
Traveled decrease 5% (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010a).
• Estimates have been made that if all households in National Ambient Air Quality
Standard Nonattainment Metropolitan Statistical Areas no more than 0.1 miles from
a transit stop, the total number of automobiles owned by those households would
go down 9% and VMT would go down 11%; his reduction is equivalent to a projected
impact of a 50% markup in the price of motor vehicle fuel (Kim & Kim, 2004).
• A study of Seattle and King County, WA found the following correlations (L. Frank, et
al., 2008a):
• An extra fourth of a mile between someone's home and the closest transit stop is,
on average, correlated with 16% less transit use.
• An extra fourth of a mile between someone's job and the closest transit stop is, on
average, correlated with 32% less transit use.
3.2.4 Walkability
Walkability is an important measure of sustainable communities and an accepted indicator
of the extent to which the built environment is friendly to the presence of people living,
shopping, visiting, enjoying or spending time in an area (Abley, 2005). The two primary
community design elements found to encourage pedestrians (1) walking access to
destinations such as parks, jobs, schools, stores, transit stops, and entertainment, and (2) a
dense street grid, which minimizes walking time.
Other design elements conducive to comfortable and safe are the presence of sidewalks,
paths, pedestrian crossings, low traffic speeds, street trees, and "eyes-on-the street" views.
Walkability is an important concept in sustainable urban design because it impacts human
health, social well-being, traffic patterns. Below we highlight the environmental, economic,
and human well-being impacts of transportation and land use planning that incorporates
walkable neighborhoods.
Attributes of Walkability
Reduced Air Pollution: To the extent that walking becomes a substitute for automobile
travel, numerous benefits have been identified including the opportunity to reduce air
pollution (L. D. Frank et al., 2006). Frank Litman (2012) estimated that walkable
neighborhoods can reduce vehicle miles travelled by 5 and 15% compared to auto-
dependent neighborhoods (Litman, 2012). Al% change in intersection density has been
correlated with a 0.12% decrease in VMT (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b).
Improved Physical Fitness: A number of health benefits and positive social outcomes have
been ascribed to walkable neighborhoods. These attributes include increased physical
activity (Adams et al., 2011; Carlson, Aytur, Gardner, & Rogers, 2012), increased
53
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
cardiovascular fitness (Hoehner, Handy, Yan, Blair, & Berrigan, 2011; Sallis, Floyd, Rodriguez,
& Saelens, 2012), and lower BMI and risk for obesity (Brown, et al., 2009; Doyle, et al., 2006;
L. D. Frank, et al., 2006; Hoehner, et al., 2011; A. C. King et al., 2011) (Sundquist et al., 2011).
Increased physical activity has been credited with lower risk for a variety of non-
communicable diseases, including coronary heart disease, type II diabetes, breast cancer,
and colon cancer (I. M. Lee et al., 2012).
Increased Social Capital: Residents of neighborhoods that are both mixed use and walkable
report increases in social capital, as measured by how well they know their neighbors,
participate politically, trust others, and are socially engaged (Leyden, 2003). Other social
interaction ascribed to walkability include increases in the average number of friends and
associates, reduced crime (with more people walking and watching over neighborhoods,
open space and main streets), increased sense of pride and increased volunteerism,
reduced risk of depression (E. M. Berke, Gottlieb, Moudon, & Larson, 2007)..
Physical Activity of Children Encouraged: Safe Routes to School, a federally funded
campaign promotes to increase the percentage of students who walk to school is also
designed to increase physical activity in children. It is in pursuit of these objectives that
some argue in favor of establishing or preserving a greater number of "community schools,"
small institutions located within easy walking distance of a large percentage of their
students' homes. However, for a community school to have most of its students walk to
class would require residential density levels far above the national average, meaning that
most communities must settle for increasing the mode share of walking for school trips
without making it the dominant mode. This limitation could potentially be for the best,
given that community schools reflect the demographics of the neighborhood.
Socioeconomically and racially segregated neighborhoods will have segregated community
schools. If a decision is made to promote community schools, elementary schools are the
best candidates, as they usually have fewer students than middle schools and high schools,
which translate to smaller attendance areas. However, middle schools and high schools
may have larger areas around them within which students and their parents choose the
mode of walking: a one-year increase in age is associated with 1.4% less probability of
getting to school by car and 0.4% more probability of getting to school by walking. With all
else being equal, though, in a situation where all students lived a half mile from their
respective schools, 34% of students could be expected to walk to school; in a situation
where all students lived one mile from school 19% of students could be expected to walk to
school. Transportation-system design features that enhance pedestrian safety also have a
significant influence on the number of students who walk to school, but not nearly as great
an influence as short travel distances (N. C. McDonald, 2008).
An association between walkability and healthy weight is not strong in low socioeconomic
neighborhoods (Casagrande, Gittelsohn, Zonderman, Evans, & Gary-Webb, 2011);
nonetheless, urban form has been shown to have an influence on weight (X. Cao,
54
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Mokhtarian, & Handy, 2007; Kaczynski & Sharratt, 2010; Krizek, 2011; Saelens, Sails, et al.,
2012).
Pedestrian Safety is Paramount
The perception of safety and the socioeconomics of the neighborhood have been reported
to influence walking more than other variables of urban form (Forman et al., 2008; L. D.
Frank, Kerr, Sallis, Miles, & Chapman, 2008).
Economic advantages ofwalkable places
A number of benefits associated with walkability have economic ramifications ; these can be
as straight forward as saving money, improving health, or even increased property
values(Active Living Research, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, & San Diego State
University, 2010; Leinberger & Alfonzo, 2012; Pivo & Fisher, 2011). Research based on the
WalkScore index of walkability indicated that a 10-point increase in WalkScore
corresponded to a 1 to 9% rise in nearby property values (Pivo & Fisher, 2011). Increased
appreciation of property values has also been reported (PricewaterhouseCoopers L. L. P. &
Lend Lease Real Estate Investments, 2002). When walkability increases the sense of
livability in a community, economic benefits can take the form of increased demand for
homes (Carnoske, et al., 2010; Jonathan Levine & Frank, 2007; T. A. Litman, 2003) and
higher retail revenues (Leinberger & Alfonzo, 2012). Walkable neighborhoods clearly
increase property values.
Quantitative relations for walkability
• Walkable, compact, neighborhoods are characterized by 5% to 15% fewer vehicle
miles travelled than auto-dependant neighborhoods (Litman, 2012).
• A 1% increase in intersection density has been correlated with a 0.39% increase in
walking (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b)
• Residents in highly walkable neighborhoods walk an average of 50 min more for
transport per week compared to residents in less walkable neighborhoods
(Sundquist et al., 2011).
• A 10-point increase in the WalkScore index corresponds to a 1% to 9% increase in
property values (Pivo & Fisher, 2011)
• A 5% increase in street connectivity, the mixing of land uses, residential densities,
and the ratio of floor area -to-land area is estimated to yield >32% more walking (L.
Frank, et al., 2008a).
Best practices and unintended consequences
Active community design to promote walking, biking, and recreation is an emerging practice
(Green & Klein, 2011). Emphasis on reducing pedestrian fatalities and providing sidewalks
are insufficient to generate walkable space. Jeff Specks (2012) observes that space must be
(1) useful, (2) safe, (3) comfortable, and (4) interesting to truly attract walkers. He argues
that planners in the United States have focused on safety to the exclusion of other elements
55
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
critically important to walkers (Speck, 2012). Policymakers can expect an increase in walking
and a decrease in driving for neighborhoods that implement some of the many approaches
designed to cater to the growing demand for community walkability (Carnoske, et al., 2010).
3.2.5 Urban parks and greenspace
Central Park in New York City is undoubtedly the most famous urban park in the United
States. The Central Park was established on 778 acres of city-owned land in the center of
Manhattan in the mid-1800s. The site for the park, purchased for $5M, was land
characterized at the time as a muddy, rocky swamp unsuitable for commercial development.
Today, Central Park has become the site of some of the most expensive real estate in the
United States Penthouses at Central Park West have sold for >$50 Million in the past 5
years., whereas the average price per square foot is approximately $4,100 in 2012 (Brennan,
2013).
Figure 13 Central Park, Manhattan, NYC
Thus, Central Park today represents a realization of the most optimistic motivations for
communities to invest in public parks and green spaces as community assets and
environmental resources. More specifically, parks and greenspaces are reported to garner
collateral benefits for human well being, local economies by way of property values and
retail revenue, and preserve at least some elements of ecosystem services. There is strong,
long standing public and voter support for green spaces (Blaha, 2005).
56
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
The American LIVES survey confirms a strong preference for green neighborhoods.
Homebuyers largely prefer village greens (85.9%), small parks (84.2%), green courts and cul-
de-sacs where children can play safely outdoors (80.5%), and shade trees (74.6%) (Hester,
2006). Moreover, green spaces are important elements of urban design and development,
with potential to strengthen the urban core while protecting the fringe from ex-urban
development spurred by demand for nature (Blaha, 2005).
Social Benefits of Parks and Green Space
Mental Health & Psychological Peace. Access and exposure to parks and green space has
the potential to improve mental and social well-being (Wolf, 2004a) (E. A. Richardson,
Pearce, Mitchell, & Kingham, 2013). Psychological studies report that nature restores
people's capacity for directed attention, which enables better processing of information
and effective stress mitigation (S. Kaplan, 1995) (Hartig & Staats, 2006). These benefits may
be especially critical in urban environments, which have been reported to hamper
recuperation from stressful actions (Roger S. Ulrich et al., 1991).
In a study of subjects asked to associate different types of places with different mood states,
mood was reported to influence interest to be around nature. The authors found that a
sense of relaxation was associated with any type of exposure to (Regan & Horn, 2005).
Similarly, the lack of green space contributed to feelings of loneliness Mass et al (2009) and
a perceived shortage of social support (Jolanda Maas, Verheij, Groenewegen, Vries, &
Spreeuwenberg, 2006).
Increased Sense of Social Well Being. Access to green space has been reported to increase
feelings of well-being (Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010; Day, 2008; R. Kaplan,
2001; Frances E. Kuo & Sullivan, 2001a), increase satisfaction with a neighborhood (R.
Kaplan, 2001), speed recovery after surgery (Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010),
improve social ties (Kazmierczak, 2013), reduce anxiety and depression (Jolanda Maas, van
Dillen, Verheij, & Groenewegen, 2009), and reduce stress (Campbell, Wiesen, United States.
Forest, United States. Forest Service. Northern Research, & Meristem, 2009; Grahn &
Stigsdotter, 2003; Roger S Ulrich, 1999; Wells & Evans, 2003). A study of a citywide effort to
green vacant properties found a significant reduction in gun assaults, in addition to a
reduction in stress (Branas et al., 2011). No change in property values was found, suggesting
that gentrification was not a cause of the change in crime rate.
In a review of the literature, Kuo found that the presence of trees and grass were linked to
positive social and mental health indicators, such as "stronger ties among neighbors,
greater sense of safety and adjustment, more supervision of children in outdoor spaces,
healthier patterns of children's play, more use of neighborhood common spaces, fewer
incivilities, fewer property crimes, and fewer violent crimes," (F. E. Kuo, 2003). She explains
this relationship by saying, "The presence of trees and well-maintained grass can transform
[barren, treeless no man's lands that discourage resident interaction and invite crime] into
57
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
pleasant, welcoming, well-used spaces. Vital, well-used neighborhood common spaces
serve to both strengthen ties among residents and deter crime, thereby creating healthier,
safer neighborhoods," (ibid.).
Green space is also linked to better concentration, learning (Moore, 2002), and academic
performance (Wolf, 2004a). A school district in California discovered that students in
classrooms with the most daylight had test scores 7-18% higher than others and the largest
improvements were in classrooms with direct views of nature (Heschong, 2002). Contact
with natural features can improve attention in both adults in children, increasing capacity
for learning. Greenness exposure may be of particular benefit to children with Attention
Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Taylor, Kuo, & Sullivan, 2001); views of nature from
the home may specifically benefit inner-city girls, who are reported to be less likely to
participate in activities outside the home(Spencer, 2002). A study of office workers found
that those with interior plants or views of exterior green spaces reported higher job
satisfaction and quality-of-life (Dravigne, Waliczek, Lineberger, &Zajicek, 2008).
Noise pollution can have a deleterious effect on both physical and mental health; vegetative
features can play a role in reducing atmospheric noise levels from urban activities by
absorbing some of the sound (Bolund & Hunhammar, 1999) and by relieving stress induced
by surrounding noise (Gidlof-Gunnarsson & Ohrstrom, 2007).Vegetation can also shield
visual intrusions such as traffic (Bolund & Hunhammar, 1999).
Recreation and Physical Activity. Parks and green space provide opportunities for
recreation, especially for children (Bedimo-Rung, Mowen, & Cohen, 2005; Cohen et al.,
2007; Giles-Corti B, 2005; Kaczynski & Henderson, 2008; Wolf, 2008). Even momentary
exposure to green space on a daily basis can increase the likelihood that a child will engage
in moderate to vigorous physical activity. This relationship is even stronger for residents of
smart growth communities (Almanza, et al., 2012). Some research shows that the presence
of safe, well designed parks close to people's homes is associated with increased moderate-
to-strenuous physical activity, especially among women and youth (Kaczynski, et al., 2010).
Other studies suggest that the facilities within a park may often be more important in
determining physical activity than proximity or number of parks (Potwarka, Kaczynski, &
Flack, 2008), or surrounding land use diversity (Kaczynski, et al., 2010). Playgrounds may be
the most important determinant of usage for children, (Potwarka, et al., 2008), whereas
trails have a strong relationship with park use for physical activity in general (Kaczynski,
Potwarka, & Saelens, 2008).
The presence of parks or green space, among other attributes such as a mix of uses, can
have a positive effect on the amount that residents walk (Kaczynski & Henderson, 2008).
In addition to causing stress and degrading mental well being, fear of crime and injury can
make people reluctant to spend time outdoors during the day, limiting mobility and physical
activity (Fullilove MT, 1998; Guite HF, 2006; Loukaitou-Sideris, 2006; P. Tucker, J. Irwin, J.
58
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Gilliland, M. He, K. Larsen, and P. Hess., 2009). The quality of parks and perceived safety of
the surrounding neighborhood shape the way people use parks or other open spaces for
physical activity. This concern may be particularly relevant for children who conduct most of
their physical activity outdoors (Baranowski, Thompson, Durant, Baranowski, & Puhl, 1993;
Sallis et al., 1993). Parental perception of safety can have a significant impact on children's
outdoor activities, and thus on their overall amount of physical activity (Weir LA, 2006).
Women's own levels of physical activity are also impacted by their perception of safety
from crime (Eyler et al., 2003; Wilbur, Chandler, Dancy, Choi, & Plonczynski, 2002).
In conclusion, the presence of recreational land use can help to promote regular outdoor
physical activity. Needless to say both actual and perceived safety from crime and injury
influence utilization of parks and greenspace
Parks, greenspace, and human physical health
Research on the link between green space and health indicate that medical patients recover
more quickly and with less use of pain medication when they have access to the natural
environment, whether visually or via the out of doors (Terrapin Bright Green, 2012; R. S.
Ulrich, 1984; Walch, 2005). Some have hypothesized that physical activity is one contributer
to improved health benefits for people with access to parks or green space (Sallis, et al.,
2012). Others have noted a positive link between social support and psychological well
being for those in green neighborhoods (Jolanda Maas, et al., 2009).
An analysis of the direct effects of physical activity in "natural" versus "synthetic" or built
environments indicated a notable difference in self-reported emotions (Bowler, et al., 2010).
Yet another element of study has been the possibility of a link between access to parks or to
greenspace to obesity or obesity related health impairments. Bell et al. found that
neighborhood greenness reduced the odds that a child's BMI would increase (Bell, Wilson,
& Liu, 2008).
A systematic review of greenspace and obesity by Lachowycz and Jones (2011) showed
equivocal relations between greenspace and obesity related health indicators (Lachowycz &
Jones, 2011).
Green neighborhoods are of particular interest as a possible factor in reducing health
disparities in disadvantaged groups. The negative correlation between greenspace and a
variety of illnesses is strongest for children and groups of low socioeconomic status (J. Maas
et al., 2009). A nationwide study in England found that greener neighborhoods reduced the
health disparity between wealthy and disadvantaged groups (Mitchell & Popham, 2008).
While greenspace has been associated with health on the neighborhood and individual
scale, this association is not supported at the citywide scale (Elizabeth A. Richardson et al.,
2012). Community cohesiveness, sense of place, and safety
59
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
The presence of vegetation in common areas of public housing projects was found to be a
favorable correlate with use of the space as well as with neighborhood social ties (F. Kuo,
Sullivan, Coley, & Brunson, 1998). In a later study, police crime reports were used to map
vegetative features and crime rates in an inner-city residential neighborhood. Greener
neighborhoods experienced fewer property crimes as well as fewer violent crimes (Frances
E. Kuo & Sullivan, 2001b). The data failed to support a commonly held notion that
vegetation encourages crime, presumably by providing hiding places.
Vacant lots, on the other hand, are documented to have higher incidences of crime and
illicit activity than comparable developed sites (Branas, et al., 2011; Garvin, Branas, Keddem,
Sellman, & Cannuscio, 2013). A 10-year longitudinal study in Philadelphia revealed that
interventions to green vacant lots were consistently associated with reductions in both gun
assaults and vandalism (Branas, et al., 2011). Access to neighborhood parks appeared to be
highly valued by urban dwellers in San Francisco. When asked to rank their preferences of
neighborhood amenities based on visual displays, Cervero and Bosselmann (1994) found
the respondents more willing to accept the higher population densities necessary to justify
rail transit service when more public parks were offered in return. Overall, availability of a
central park increased the average ratings of the densest neighborhoods, and not having a
park slightly lowered the ratings of the less dense ones. Whereas a public park was clearly
perceived as a positive amenity, its ability to compensate for density seemed to holdup for
a density threshold of approximately 36 dwelling units per acre.
Property values
Many hedonic studies have revealed a positive relationship between housing prices and
access to, or distance from, parks (Crompton, 2001), green space, open space, and or water
features (McConnell, 2005) (Cho, Poudyal, & Roberts, 2008), (Morancho, 2003), (Kroeger,
2008) (S. T. Anderson & West, 2006; Luttik, 2000; McConnell, 2005), (Active Living Research,
et al., 2010). Properties adjacent to parks or open space may have from 7% to 32% higher
property values, depending on the proximity and type of park or amenity (Fausold &
Lilieholm, 1999). Water features in particular can have a significant effect on house prices
(Luttik, 2000). Increases in property values correspond to greater tax revenues for local
governments. Rising property values trigger a series of responses, including the sale,
subdivision, and development of nearby properties. All of these events have the potential
to stimulate gentrification and squeezing out lower income inhabitants.
In a review of the open-space literature, Kroeger notes that the value of proximity to open
space is greater when open space is scarce. Proximity to open space, therefore, tends to
have a higher value, and a larger relative effect on property values, in more urbanized areas
(Kroeger, 2008) consistent with market principles of supply and demand. When demand is
high, availability low, then price goes up.
60
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Anderson and West confirm these findings, and add that "the value of proximity to open
space is higher in neighborhoods that are dense, near the central business district, high-
income, high-crime, or home to many children," (S. T. Anderson & West, 2006).
Furthermore, the type of open space that is valued depends on the degree of urbanization,
with more highly manicured features preferred in urban core areas (Cho, et al., 2008).
Laverne and Winson-Geidman (2003) analyzed commercial rental rates, which were 7%
higher when well designed landscaping was present. Conversely, when landscaping acted as
a visual shield, obscuring the business from the street for example, rent prices were
negatively impacted. Business owners and merchants often have a negative view of
vegetation, resenting the associated debris or visual obstruction from vegetation. Evidence
that shoppers value green retail areas, and are even willing to pay more when shopping in
greener areas, could therefore be valuable information for merchant groups. Wolf found
that shoppers were willing to pay about 10% more for products in shopping areas with
trees (Wolf, 2003). In a different study in Athens, Georgia, Wolf found that visitors to a
central business district assigned high visual quality ratings to retail areas with a full tree
canopy and considered street tree canopy to be an integral amenity in shopping
environments (Wolf, 2004b). This has important implications for cities that are looking to
revitalize commercial areas.
Ecosystem health and biotic integrity
Urban ecosystems behave differently, and provide different types of goods and services
than non-urban ecosystems. A study of oak stands along a rural-to-urban gradient, for
example, revealed that urban forests display unique ecosystem structure and function
compared to suburban and rural forests (McDonnell et al., 1997). The authors concluded
that urban stressors such as air pollution, heavy metals in the soil contributed negatively,
whereas heat island effects, and the presence of earthworms (McDonnell, et al., 1997) were
among the positive factors affecting urban wooded areas. Urban forests are, essentially,
fragmented forest stands, and are likely to have simplified, less diverse species composition,
in addition to altered energy flow, nutrient cycling, and hydrological cycles (Marina Alberti,
2005).
Land use practices and landscape interventions to protect resources and habitat can
improve ecosystem functioning not just at the local scale, but at the regional scale as by
reducing or mitigating habitat fragmentation, encouraging biodiversity and species richness
in native species populations, and reducing environmental stressors to flora and fauna.
Many studies have focused on the environmental and ecosystem impacts of vegetative land
cover versus impervious cover. Alberti et al. (2007) contend that rather than merely looking
at percent imperviousness, variables describing configuration and connectivity of the
landscape, such as mean patch size and number of road crossings, can provide a more
61
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
nuanced understanding of the relationship between landscape pattern and biological
condition.(M. Alberti, et al., 2007)
Water Quality, Aquatic habitat, aquatic species
The negative effect of urban landscapes, particularly those with a high percentage of
impervious land cover can have a profound effect on water quality (Klein, 1976) (Arnold,
1996),impacts biotic integrity(Miltner, White, & Yoder, 2004) (Yoder & Rankin, 1996),
aquatic habitat, and species health (Klein, 1976) (Marina Alberti, 2005), including humans.
Immediate upstream land use has a large impact on stream quality (Steedman, 1988).
However, the negative effects of impervious surfaces on biotic integrity and fish diversity
are lessened by the presence of dense riparian vegetation or when the floodplain and
riparian buffer are relatively undeveloped (Miltner, et al., 2004) (Horner, Booth, Azous, &
May, 1997). (Miltner, et al., 2004) have concluded that mandatory riparian buffer widths
are critical to preserve sensitive areas and minimize hydrologic modification.
The current state for many cities there is that of buried streams. The day lighting of urban
streams - opening underground stream channels - has become recognized as worthwhile
useful strategy for improving urban ecosystem function and providing greater access to
features of nature within urban landscapes.
Plant diversity
There is a positive correlation between plant diversity and the density, size, and age of
habitat patches available to plant species within an urban area (Bastin & Thomas, 1999).
Shorter distance between patches is also correlated with higher likelihood of species
becoming established. Plant diversity and richness is improved in urban settings with larger
patch sizes, closely spaced patches, and longevity of patches. There is evidence that a
moderate level of urbanization, typically found in suburban areas, is associated with an
increase in plant species richness (McKinney, 2008). This evidence can guide urban
conservation and habitat conservation efforts to more effectively support urban plant
diversity (Bastin & Thomas, 1999). A good rule of thumb land development is that infilling
and repurposing of abandoned or vacant land if far more effective for protection of
ecosystems than is the converting of natural land to developed landscapes. Put another
way, ecosystem productivity and function is best preserved when land remains
undeveloped. Improvements in the quality and connectivity of patches within urban and
suburban areas could contribute to regional ecological connectivity, and thus to biodiversity,
species richness, and ecosystem health.
Urban vegetation, soil and water
Leaf litter and other forest debris create duff on the forest floor that provides habitat for
macro invertebrates (worms, insect larvae, etc.), fungi, and microbial communities. These
macro invertebrates and microbial communities perform the important ecological function
of decomposition of dead plants and animals. The decomposition process releases nutrients
62
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
for further uptake by vegetation and contributes to the fertility and organic content of
forest soils. The resulting decomposition protects soil is an early step in the process of soil
biogenesis. Not only is soil created but the potential for erosion is reduced and water
infiltration through the soil is promoted. These processes reduce runoff, protect systems
from flash flooding, and contribute to ecosystem function. Land becomes better protected
from erosion and runoff is reduced. Deforestation removes this litter, exposing soil and
increasing erosion, runoff, and sedimentation. These impacts in turn can increase the risk of
flooding, and in urban areas, the risk of sewer overflows (Manning, 2008). An additional
consequence is that the resilience of the system to disturbance is reduced; vulnerability to
natural disasters is increased as well as the recovery time for disasters I.
Bird communities
Bird communities are also affected by living in urban habitats. Certain bird species are too
sensitive to disturbance to survive in urban habitats (Blair, 1996). However, for those that
can, a variety of factors can improve their survival rate. There is consensus that larger
habitat patches support more species, but there are other factors that are important for
urban bird communities (Nilon & Pais, 1997). Habitat quality, site design, location within
the city, and the unique site history may all be more important than patch size (Ibid).
Residential yards play an important role in bird abundance and diversity. Native trees are
important sources of food, shelter, and habitat to migrating birds. For this reason
landscaping of developed areas would support wildlife by making choices of native species
rather than horticultural cultivars. For example, native desert bird species are more
abundant in neighborhoods that are closer to large desert tracts and that have more desert
landscaping in the residential yards(Gilbert, 1989). This highlights the importance of
promoting natural native habitat in urban areas. While the benefits of habitat patches in
urban areas are well documented, the role of connectivity is less well known. . Although
habitat corridors have been shown to be a valuable tool in regional settings, only recently
has there been empirical evidence to link habitats in urban settings to improve biodiversity
(Ignatieva, et al., 2011).
Air quality
Urban vegetation, trees in particular, have positive impacts on air quality, contributing to
lower concentrations of particulate matter and lead (Cavanagh, Zawar-Reza, & Wilson,
2009; Francisco J. Escobedo et al., 2008). For urban forests, the area and height of the tree
stand makes a difference in the net removal of air pollutants. Particulate matter and lead
(210 Pb) concentrations are also lower in the interior of an urban forest compared to the
forest edge (Cavanagh, et al., 2009).
Trees improve air quality even when dispersed throughout an urban environment. Evidence
shows that particulate matter concentrations are lower in neighborhoods that have a
greater percentage of canopy cover (60%) than those with less than 40% cover (Cavanagh,
63
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
et al., 2009). Escobedo and Nowak (2009) found that in Santiago, Chile, improvements in
particulate matter (PM10) concentrations varied between 1.6% in areas with 26% tree
cover to 6.1% in areas with 100% tree cover. The magnitude of removal of pollutants by
trees varied depending upon season and pollution concentration.
The relationship between trees and air-quality is multi-dimensional. (F. J. Escobedo, Kroeger,
& Wagner, 2011).
(Calfapietra et al., 2013). Nonetheless, for urban contexts, choosing low BVOC emitting
trees that are well adapted to the local habitat can play an important role in keeping urban
ozone levels within safe boundaries (ibid).
While landscape-scale patches are better at improving air quality than smaller scale stands,
Escobedo et al (2011) emphasize that the ecosystem services from trees can be beneficial at
smaller scales, too. For example, tree stands can also contribute to air quality when located
is smaller groupings near schools or hospitals, or in lots without buildings (vacant). Finally,
the association between urban forest cover and improved air quality and carbon
sequestration is primarily supported by models rather than experimental data (Cavanagh,
et al., 2009). A more rigorous understanding of the thresholds and conditions of urban
forest cover to achieve air quality benefits could be beneficial especially in combination
with regional information on the specific species of trees and the flora and fauna affected
by them.
Carbon sequestration
All tree sequester carbon-trees in US urban areas have been estimated to sequester 25.6
million tones of carbon annually (D. J. Nowak, Greenfield, Hoehn, & Lapoint, 2013). Several
studies have investigated the c of urban trees to offset C02 emission. For example,
Escobedo et al (2010) determined that urban trees offset between 1.8% and 3.4% of total
city-wide carbon emissions. In a study of New England, Zheng et al (2013) estimated that
the region's urban and community forests accounted for 8.2% of the net regional forest
carbon sequestration. Urban trees can reduce carbon emissions indirectly by providing
shade, evapotranspiration, and wind speed reduction. All of these functions can lessen the
need for air conditioning or heating, respectively. In a neighborhood in Chicago, 33% shade
tree cover was found to have reduced residential carbon emissions by 3.2 to3.9% (Jo &
McPherson, 2001). This study highlighted the importance of the placement of shade trees;
in the wrong place, shade trees can increase the need for heating in the winter (ibid).
Air temperature & heat island
Trees and vegetation can reduce air temperatures and mitigate the urban heat island effect
through two processes. First, trees and shrubbery provide shade, absorb sunlight for
photosynthesis and reflect sunlight back to the atmosphere. Second, evapotranspiration,
the movement of water from soils through vascular plants followed by release as water
vapor from the leaf surface is inherently a cooling process. In combination, the net effect of
64
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
shading and evapotranspiration can be a significant impact on air temperatures. Air
temperatures in urban tree groves can be 99F cooler than temperatures over adjacent open
terrain. Suburban areas with mature trees can be 4° to 69F cooler than new suburbs
without trees (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2008). Yu and Hien (2006)
found in a study of two large parks in Singapore (12 hectares and 36 hectares) that air
temperatures were cooler not only in the parks, but also in adjacent built environments. For
these reasons, green infrastructure is promoted as a key element of climate-resilient urban
design (Raven, 2011).
Reductions in peak air temperatures can benefit human well-being, especially in urban
environments, temperate climates, during hot summer months. A primary concern is that
extreme heat events increase the risk of heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and death,
particularly among sensitive groups such as the elderly, infants, and those lacking air
conditioning (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a). Evidence also links hot
temperatures to aggression and violence (C. A. Anderson, 2001; Hsiang, Burke, & Miguel,
2013). Estimates show a 2- increase in air temperature would lead to about 9 more
murders or assaults per 100,000 people in the U.S. (C. A. Anderson, 2001). A review of
quantitative studies reveals that an increase of 1 standard deviation in temperatures
predicts a 4% rise in the frequency of interpersonal violence and a 14% rise in the frequency
of intergroup conflict (Hsiang, et al., 2013).
Quantitative Relations for parks and greenspace
• In high minority census block groups in Baltimore, blacks have access to 12.75 acres
of park per 1000 people, versus 53.02 acres for whites in low minority census block
groups (Boone, Buckley, Grove, & Sister, 2009)
• Properties adjacent to parks have been shown to range from 7% to32% higher
property values (Fausold & Lilieholm, 1999).
• In Santiago, Chile, areas with 26% tree cover had particulate matter (PM10)
concentrations 1.6% lower than areas without tree cover; by comparison 100% tree
cover showed 6.1% lower PMlOlevels (Francisco J. Escobedo & Nowak, 2009).
• Carbon sequestration by urban forests offset 18% of the industrial carbon emissions
in Hangzhou, China (M. Zhao, Kong, Escobedo, & Gao, 2010)
• Urban trees offset from 1.8% and 3.4% of total city-wide carbon (F. Escobedo, et al.,
2010)
• Air temperatures in urban tree groves are about 99F cooler compared to nearby
open terrain; suburban areas with mature trees are from 4 to 69F cooler than new
suburbs without trees (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2008)
• A 2s fahrenheit increase in air temperature is associated with 9 more murders or
assaults per 100,000 people in the U.S. (C. A. Anderson, 2001).
65
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• An increase of 1 standard deviation in temperatures predicts a 4% rise in the
frequency of interpersonal violence and a 14% rise in the frequency of intergroup
conflict (Hsiang et al., 2013)
• Shoppers were willing to pay about 10% more for similar products shopping areas
with trees (Wolf, 2003).
Best practices and unintended consequences
Green Infrastructure
The concept of green infrastructure has gained traction in recent years as cities and towns
look for ways to reduce the negative impacts of urbanization while accruing the benefits
offered by vegetative and natural features in the urban landscape. Reference to these
natural and vegetative features as infrastructure is intended to elevate them in importance
within planning contexts, so that they are given the same consideration as other types of
urban infrastructure that provide important services supporting human life and well-being
(McMahon & Benedict, 2003).
r
A Site-Based Stormwater Calculator,
produced by SSWR Task 7.1A is an online
calculator that estimates amount and
frequency of stormwater runoff from a
specific site under a variety of land use
scenarios. This tool is an online calculator
that will estimate the annual amount and
frequency of storm-water runoff from a
specific site based on local soil conditions,
land cover, and historical rainfall records.
This can be simulated under a variety of
land-use scenarios. Watershed modelers
at the local and state level will find this a
valuable tool to identify site-specific land
use and green infrastructure
improvements can prevent or reduce
urban stormwater runoff and its
consequences.
http://www. epa. gov/research/waterscien
ce/water-models-data-tools. htm
Box 15. SHC Product Highlight
A
The US Environmental Protection
Agency's definition places an
emphasis on absorbing and/or
reusing rainwater where it falls,
whereas Benedict and McMahon
(2006) define green infrastructure as
"an interconnected green space
network (including natural areas and
features, public and private
conservation lands, working lands
with conservation values, and other
protected open spaces) that is
planned and managed for its natural
resource values and for the
associated benefits it confers to
human populations." They stress the
importance of strategically planning
for the interconnection of green
space and natural features in order to
maximize their ecological function
and therefore their benefits to
society.
V
J
In practice, Benedict and McMahon
(2006) recommend that a green
66
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
infrastructure strategy address this network of features, integrating conservation land and
constructed interventions at various scopes and scales. Green infrastructure can include
features at the site scale (such as rain gardens and trees) as well as features at the
landscape or regional scales (such as city parks or conservation lands). In their discussion of
urban forest restoration strategies, Duryea, Binelli, and Korhnak (2000) also stress the
importance of including a variety of practices at different scales in order to reestablish
structure and function to urban ecosystems.
One of the primary drivers of green infrastructure implementation is the need for
stormwater management. Where there is not enough grey infrastructure capacity (e.g.
drains, culverts, tunnels etc. to convey stormwater) to service growing populations, or to
accommodate large storm events, some municipalities are looking to green infrastructure
as a more cost-effective strategy. Green infrastructure can intercept and, in some cases,
infiltrate stormwater into the ground, reducing the amount of stormwater that flows into
sewer systems, and thus preventing combined sewer overflow (CSOs) or sanitary sewer
overflow (SSO) events that discharge untreated sewage into receiving waters. Avoiding
CSO/SSO events can reduce the costs of regulatory compliance and capital investments in
grey infrastructure (Odefey et al., 2012). For an example for a related practice called low
impact development (LID), a 2007 EPA study of 17 case studies found that LID methods
incur lower total capital costs compared to conventional stormwater management systems.
Savings ranged from 15% to 80% (Environmental Protection Agency, 2007). A more recent
study in New York City has demonstrated energy cost savings through an LID approach,
though a slow environmental payback time (Spatari, Yu, & Montalto, 2011),
Washington D.C. has proposed incorporating the green area ratio (GAR), a site level metric
of green surface cover of a parcel, into the zoning code. It may mandate a minimum
proportion of green cover to impervious surface cover on a parcel (Keeley, 2011). However,
critics note that such a requirement may create a perverse incentive for low density
development on large lots, and penalize high density developments that use space
efficiently.
Improving Accessibility & Usage of Parks and Green Space
Accessibility is an important factor in whether parks are used and if benefits are gained
from their presence. However, accessibility can differ by race and socioeconomic class,
which may contribute to disparities in health-related outcomes, particularly for youth, in
areas that don't have access to other resources for physical activity (Godbey, Caldwell,
Floyd, & Payne, 2005; Vaughan et al., 2013). Some researchers have concluded that areas
with a large minority population and or low socioeconomic status (SES) contain significantly
fewer parks and recreational resources than their counterparts (Boone, et al., 2009).
Socioeconomic status (SES) is typically measured as some combination of education, income,
and occupation. Similarly, some have found inequalities in access to biodiversity, depriving
some populations of the sense of wonder and excitement at encountering a wider range of
67
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
Perceived
neighborhood
safety
I ncrease access
to parks and
green space
Increase social
connections/
social cohesion
Park quality and
amenities
Decrease
psychosocial
stress
Increase physical
activity
Decrease crime
rates
Increase usage
Inequality in park
access and park
acreage by race &
socioeconomics
An assortment of positive
benefits both to individuals
and the community
flora and fauna. For example, residents in lower SES neighborhoods encountered fewer bird
species and were less likely to encounter native birds (Gilbert, 1989). Furthermore, the
parks that are accessible in low SES neighborhoods tend to be smaller (Boone, et al., 2009;
Sister, Wolch, & Wilson, 2010) and higher in crime, which may offset the benefits of access
(Cutts, Darby, Boone, & Brewis, 2009).
There are other factors that affect park quality and influences usage and, thus, community-
level benefits (Hoehner et al., 2010). These include design, amenities, and acreage
(Kaczynski, et al., 2008; P. Tucker, Gilliland, & Irwin, 2007). Aesthetic features, determined
by physical design, may contribute to feelings of safety and comfort (Lovasi, et al., 2011).
The presence of shade, cleanliness, and infrastructure such as bathrooms, water fountains,
outdoor lighting, and play structures have been identified as key factors in influencing
parents' choices about where to take their children to play (P. Tucker, Gilliand, & Irwin,
2007).
Park components that attract youth include "sports fields/facilities for movement,
walkways and paths, shadow and shelter, trees, water elements, maintenance, renovation,
form and size, openness, naturalness and safety," (Gardsjord, 2013) The conceptual
framework below captures the human well-being effects of increased access to parks and
green spaces.
Figure 14 Conceptual framework capturing the human well-being effects of increased access to parks and green spaces.
Dashed lines represent potential mediators
68
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
In a study of park usage that tracked over 8000 users, white male children were much more
likely to engage in moderate to vigorous physical activity than non-white female children.
Significant differences in intensity levels varied by race and gender among teens and adults
as well (Kaczynski, Wilhelm Stanis, Hastmann, & Besenyi, 2011).
Approaches are being developed which can help prioritize the development of greenspace
and help communities make the most of their park systems. Moseley et al (2013) have
published a modeling approach to help communities manage a green network that meets
the needs of both transportation and leisure users and aims to improve accessibility in areas
of higher social deprivation. Kaczynski et al (2012) have developed a Community Park Audit
Tools (CPAT) that communities can use to assess how effectively their parks promote
physical activity. The tool includes measures of accessibility, amenities, quality, and safety
(ibid). The tool built upon existing park audit tools such as the Environmental Assessment of
Public Recreation Spaces (EAPRS) to provide a tool that assessed youth needs, was user
friendly, and was developed and tested with community stakeholders in order to ensure it
was meaningful and applicable to a diverse group. Finally, The Trust for Public Land has
published a guidebook that highlights the most important urban park practices to promote
health (Harnik & Welle, 2011).
Urban Forestry
Successful urban forests depend on good design strategies. Ideally trees are placed and
spaced so that they don't interfere with visibility, traffic signals, and existing municipal
infrastructure (Burden, 2006). Sufficient space and soil quality can prolong the truncated
lifespan of urban street trees as well as reduce sidewalk heaving as crowded roots stretch
out between compacted soil and sidewalks (Buscaino, Upchurch, Whitlow, & Wellborn,
2008). Information to guide both property owners and maintenance personnel to plant "the
right tree in the right place" can maximize benefits of energy savings, shade, beauty, air
quality, and stormwater management. Another consideration for residential trees is to
select species that reduce burdens of allergens, maintenance requirements, and damage
from limb breakage, and are not likely to interfere with power lines (Lipkis & Lipkis, 1990;
McPherson, 2003). Resident satisfaction with a street or yard tree is likely to be greater if
the vegetation is planted by an occupant. When residents join neighbors to plant trees,
there is the additional benefit of building social capital that accrues when neighbors work
together toward a common goal (Sommer, Learey, Summit, & Tirrell, 1994).
Some organizations, such as Tree People in Los Angeles, Boston Tree Party, and Casey Trees
in Washington DC, have fruit tree programs in addition to their other tree planting
programs. These programs aim to increase the numbers of fruit trees in urban areas as a
means of producing food within the urban ecosystem, especially to low-income residents
(Casey Trees, 2013; The Boston Tree Party, 2011; Tree People, 2013).
69
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
When urban trees must be cut, utilizing them for wood products reduces waste, reduces
resource demands, and reduces costs that municipalities or landowners would otherwise
pay to remove and dispose of unwanted trees (Bratkovich, 2001).
Full accounting of costs and benefits
Without full accounting for the pubic costs and benefits of parks and other greenspace,
these public resources are often undervalued and may be usurped for commercial purposes,
thus allowing private land-use to overcall the provision for quality public space. Lambert
(2007) argues that the asset values as well as the co-benefit values of parks should be
accounted for in civic balance sheets. Valuations of parks with monetization of collateral
benefits would make it possible to all allocate resources for their maintenance. The Trust
for Public Land provides one example of a more comprehensive valuation of the parks in
New York's Nassau and Suffolk counties, incorporating quantitative values for reduced
costs of government services; recreation & tourism; agriculture; government revenue and
cost savings; as well as a qualitative discussion of un-quantified co-benefits (The Trust for
Public Land, 2010). The study concluded that parks and open spaces have a much lower net
cost-to-government services-per-acre ratio than residential development. In addition, parks
contribute to a large recreation and tourism industry, as well as provide many other
benefits to society that could not yet be quantified.
3.2.6 Regional accessibility
Accessibility may be measured at either a local/neighborhood scale or at a regional scale.
At the local/neighborhood scale, accessibility may be represented as the average distance
from a person's home (or place of work) to the nearest store (or other destination). At the
regional scale, common measures include the distance from a given point to the nearest
central business district (CBD) and an
inventory of the number of jobs or
other destinations that can be reached
from a given geographical point within
a given period of time (R. Ewing &
Cervero, 2010b). Travel behavior
impacts of regional accessibility
The accessibility of destinations is the
single most important factor shaping
people's travel behaviors. After
accessibility,separate measures of
intersection density, land use diversity,
transportation network design, or
proximity to public transit can all be
influential in shaping transportation
decisions (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b).
Box 16. Decision Support Tool
i-Tree Urban Forest Assessment
Applications provides a suite of tools at
different scales to help urban forest
managers quantify ecosystem services
provided by community trees, including
pollution mitigation, carbon
sequestration, water quality and
stream flow, shade, and aesthetic
benefits. The tools were developed by
the US Forest Service and are available
here: http://www.itreetools.org
70
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
The amount of time in transit (Lawrence Frank, Bradley, Kavage, Chapman, & Lawton,
2008b) trip frequency, socioeconomic factors are also predictive., Trip length, however, is
influenced by land use and infrastructure (the "built environment") to a greater extent than
by socioeconomic variables (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b).
More than anything else, regional accessibility has a substantial influence on VMT, which
itself is a driver of many different sustainability outcomes: energy use and greenhouse gas
emissions
If a dense, mixed-use, highly-walkable development is created in a remote location, it will
still generate more private automobile travel than if it were located in an urban core. In
urban core neighborhoods, a greater variety of trip destinations are near enough to be
reached by non-motorized modes.
A 1% increase in accessibility of employment locations by automobile has been associated
with a 0.2% decrease in vehicle miles traveled. The authors reported a stronger correlation
between VMT than any other aspect of the built environment (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b).
Economics, accessibility, and transportation
Accessibility drives development. In general, destination accessibility promotes economic
development; therefore, policies to increase destination accessibility can positively affect
the economy. Not surprisingly, the economic benefits of destination accessibility are
greatest in places that are in close proximity to transportation infrastructure, meaning that
such places are particularly good candidates for increased development. However, the
benefits of locating in these places are offset by various economic disbenefits that come
from building near a major transportation corridor, such as noise pollution and air pollution
(Hof, Heyma, & van der Hoorn, 2012; Jha & Kim, 2006).
Accessibility, travel time, and social interaction
In those places where regional accessibility is low, the longer travel times that people
consequently experience can have numerous negative effects on their lives. If someone has
to spend a large percentage of their time traveling, they have less time to spend with their
family, less time for social interactions, and less time for exercise and recreation, especially
if the low destination accessibility of the region not just increases the durations of the trips
people need to make but also the durations of their discretionary trips, which are
consequently make fewer (Besser, Marcus, & Frumkin, 2008a; T. J. Christian, 2012a, 2012b;
Dickens, Richards, Greaves, & Campbell, 2011; Fujiwara & Kawachi, 2008; Holt-Lunstad,
Smith, & Layton, 2010).
Quantitative relations for regional accessibility
• A 1% increase in an index of the accessibility of employment locations by automobile
reduces Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by 0.20% (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b)
71
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• On average, a 1% increase in parking spaces per 1000 employees in the central
business district of a region decreased transit boardings per capita per year by 1.27%
in a study of data from numerous major cities around the world over a timeframe of
multiple decades, if all else is assumed constant and allowance is made for the fact
that this elasticity value varies with the size of the input variable (Sinha, 2003).
Unintended Consequences
Tradeoff of exposure to air pollution
Greater destination-accessibility is able to help reduce overall air pollution from
automobiles by reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled. However, locations that are within a short
travel time of a large number of destinations are very often in close proximity to high-
volume roadways, where concentrations of motor-vehicle-generated air pollution are the
greatest. Therefore, people who live, work, or go to school in locations that have high
destination-accessibility may be at greater-than-average risk of experiencing the negative
health effects of near-road pollution (Ghosh et al., 2012). This includes approximately 30-
45% of people living in urban areas in the United States (Y. Zhou & Levy, 2007).
Amongst the pollutants found in high concentrations near roadways are nitrogen oxides
(NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). In recent decades, technological changes have reduced the quantities of some
pollutants that vehicles emit per mile of travel, but this benefit has been offset by increased
rates of driving (Dallmann & Harley, 2010). Recent research has highlighted the potential of
on street parking to act as a buffer to protect pedestrians from roadway air pollutants
(Gallagher, Gill, & McNabola, 2011).
Although links between exposures to traffic-generated pollutants and adverse health effects
have been established (HEI Panel on the Health Effects of Traffic-Related Air Pollution,
2010), uncertainty remains about what level of exposure to near-road pollutants causes
these adverse effects and about the important metrics in determining potential risks, such
as the distances away from roadways and/or traffic volumes of concern. This is because the
transport of near-road pollutants from their sources is affected by such factors as building
locations and design, topography, wind speed and direction, and roadway design features
(Baldauf et al., 2009).
Tradeoff of exposure to noise pollution
Because locations with great destination accessibility are often near high-volume roadways,
residents may be exposed to elevated levels of noise from motor-vehicle traffic. According
to studies, there is an association between exposure to noise from automobile traffic and
negative health outcomes. For more on these studies, see subsection 3.4.7 of this synthesis
paper, on the impacts of roads as a land use.
72
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Impervious surface
In remote locations, where destination accessibility is typically low, transportation-related
land-use per-capita at the regional scale increases, on account of more transportation
infrastructure being required to link dispersed structures (Brabec, 2009). Transportation-
related impervious land cover exerts a large hydrological impact because it is comprised of
connected areas that drain directly into streams (J. G. Lee & Heaney, 2003; T. R. Schueler,
1994). Consequently, built-up pollutants and flows of stormwater directly enter surface
water systems, with potential to reduce both drinking-water quality and functioning of
aquatic ecosystems. However, the percentage of overall land cover that is impervious in
rural areas is still lower than in urban and suburban areas. For more information on
transportation-related impervious surfaces, refer to subsection 3.4.7 of this synthesis paper,
which discusses the impacts of roads.
Water infrastructure implications
In many metropolitan areas, highways and commuter transit lines have improved
accessibility to remote locations. As a result, exurban leapfrog developments are created,
whose travel activities are oriented towards a particular urbanized area but which are
separated from the metropolitan area by a significant expanse of undeveloped land (R. H.
Ewing, 2008). Often, these developments are too remote for it to be practical to connect
them to the water and sewage systems that serve the nearby urbanized area. Consequently,
these developments either come to be served by small community water and sewage
systems or by privately owned wells and septic tanks. Because water and wastewater
systems are difficult to change, these small-scale systems may remain in place in leapfrog
development after the nearby urbanized area can expand to abut against the once remote
parcel. Small-scale water and wastewater systems tend to be based on technology more
prone to leakage and seepage. Monitoring for well water contaminants is at the discretion
of the owner in most cases. Microbial and toxicant intrusion to drinking water may remain
undetected and unremedied for years (O. o. R. a. D. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, 2007; O. o. R. a. D. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, 2002).
3.2.7 Compact development pattern
In the United States, urban land is projected to increase from 3.1 % in 2000 to 8.1 % of the
country in 2050 under a business as usual scenario (D. J. Nowak & Walton, 2005). If a more
compact development pattern is applied widely, the amount of open space converted to
urban development could be significantly reduced.
Compactness refers to a development pattern that is contained and contiguous. Evidence
shows that compact, centered, cities that have established transit systems reduce VMT and
increase transit ridership, which also decreases overall emissions on a regional basis. The
paradox of this phenomenon is that dense, compact cities also support higher population
densities and can increase congestion. This effect counteracts and may even surpass the
73
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
emission reduction due to lower VMT at a local level, leading to equal or increased
emissions within the city, even as emissions in the region as a whole go down. Some
researchers have attempted to address this problem by studying how design can impact the
dispersion of pollution, reducing pollution hot-spots (Jenks, Burton, & Williams, 1996).
One objection to compact development is that the trend toward lower density single-use
residential neighborhoods originally stemmed from desires to escape the overcrowding of
cities. This concern is addressed in two ways, 1) advances in sanitation, ventilation, and
architecture that allows for more light and airy spaces reduce the discomforts of denser
living, and 2) the residential densities advocated by most practitioners today remain very
moderate (at between 7-12 units per acre for single family homes).
Compact development, land conservation, and extreme heat events
There are many environmental benefits of a compact development pattern. Land
conversion occurs at a slower pace given the same growth in population, protecting rural
and agricultural land and open space (McLaren, 1992; United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 2001). In turn, land preservation supports increased biodiversity (United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 2001). Finally, there is evidence that compact
cities experience fewer extreme heat events than dispersed cities. The sprawling
metropolitan regions have experienced an increase and even doubling of extreme heat
events when compared to the most compact metropolitan regions (between 1956 and
2005) (Stone, etal., 2010).
Congestion and compact development
High traffic congestions and increased use of impervious surfaces are common
consequences of compact development (Melia, et al., 2011; Sarzynski, et al., 2006).
Fortunately, compact urban areas that have short distances to transit stops may well
ameliorate the congestion (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010b). It is possible that compact
development increases the proximate impervious surface cover as well. However an
increase in impervious surface cover per unit area may not be detrimental, if the impervious
surface per capita is reduced overall in the region. Additional research is necessary to
characterize this relation.
Impervious surfaces and compact development
Compact development typically leads to higher impervious surface cover than more
disperse developments; however, another important dimension to consider is the per
capita ration of impervious surface cover. For example, a suburban neighborhood will have
relatively low percent total impervious area (PTIA) compared to an apartment building,
however to house the same number of people in a suburban development will require
impervious surfaces to extend over a greater swath of land.
Compact development concentrates higher PTIA over a smaller area, which may reduce the
region wide levels of impervious surfaces, but may allow very high impervious surface cover
74
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
in very populated areas. For the purpose of comparing alternative development patterns, a
per capita measure of impervious surfaces may be more meaningful. Research to quantify
the advantages and disadvantages inherent in this tradeoff would be a valuable
contribution to the literature.
Energy consumption of compact development
One benefit currently under debate is if, and to what degree, compact development is
associated with energy consumption. Research suggests that moderately compact
development may be the most sustainable form. This form may have the lowest overall
energy usage, and may relieve traffic congestion whilst still supporting a robust transit
system. A comparison study of several Norwegian cities found the moderate density cities
to have the lowest residential energy consumption levels, including both transportation and
household energy use (Holden & Norland, 2005).
Household energy use varies by housing type, however the difference between single
family home energy use and row houses and multifamily housing has declined in more
recently built homes in the Norwegian cities studied, as energy saving methods became
commonplace in single family homes. The differences in overall energy usage were more
affected by travel. Both moderate and high density areas consumed less energy for
everyday transport, due to shorter distances and transit use. Higher energy usage in the
densest cities was primarily due to higher wealth and therefore increased consumption,
particularly of leisure travel by plane. It's not clear whether this is due to residents'
preferences or due to compensating for a lack of access to outdoor recreation on an
everyday basis. The fact that residences with access to a garden or yard consume less
energy for leisure travel by car or plane suggests the latter may be true. The link between
higher wealth in the densest cities and increased consumption and carbon footprint has
been replicated in Finland (Heinonen, et al., 2011). However it is an opportunity for
additional research, particularly to see if the relationship holds in the U.S. context.
Compact development and walkability
Compact development has benefits for human well-being that are more difficult to quantify
than single dimensional indicators, such as walkability A compact development pattern is
consistent with neighborhood walkability and a mix of uses. Other characteristics of
walkable neighborhoods include street connectivity and resident density alone were not
associated with body mass index (BMI) (K. N. McDonald, et al., 2012). Less sprawl is
consistently associated with more walking (I. M. Lee, Ewing, & Sesso, 2009). However
moving from a county high on a sprawl index to a more compact area is not associated with
an increase in walking or a decrease in BMI (ibid).
Commute times in compact development
Commute time also is related to compact development, but the essential factors are not
always clearly identifiable. As mentioned above, compact development readily leads to
75
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
traffic congestion. However commute time is also affected by distance and mode choice,
and walking, bicycling, or taking transit can be significantly quicker in compact cities. Yet
there may be many options available to alleviate the downsides of compact urban forms.
Some studies have found a decrease in commute time(L. D. Frank, et al., 2010), others no
correlation at all (R. Ewing, Pendall, Chen, Trb, & Trb, 2003). What is clear is that individuals
with shorter commute times enjoy higher levels of social capital, as measured by the
frequency of social trips (Besser, Marcus, & Frumkin, 2008b).
Housing affordability in compact cities
The success of municipal regulations to achieve compact development and its impact on the
supply of affordable housing is of current interest as communities seek to realize the
benefits of compact development.
Four main points dominate the literature on this issue.
First, both traditional zoning and urban growth controls have the potential to raise housing
prices. Traditional zoning often enforces low-density single family homes, which reduces the
supply of homes and can raise prices (Nelson, Pendall, Dawkins, & Knaap, 2002).
Second, although planning policy can influence housing prices, market demand is the far
greater driver (C. J. Dawkins & Nelson, 2002; Nelson, et al., 2002; Phillips & Goodstein,
2007).
Third, affordability can be impacted if strict growth controls are implemented in quickly
growing regions without any accompanying changes in zoning, regulations, or regional
planning. This appears to be what happened in Petaluma, San Jose, and other areas of
California (Nelson, Pendall, Dawkins, & Knaap, 2002).
Finally, growth controls to increase allowable residential density and housing type mix
whether implemented with or without regional planning and zoning reforms have no
noticeable impact on the availability of affordable housing. Evidence from Portland, OR,
indicates that while the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) may have increased property values,
the attendant increase in density led to an increase in the overall supply of housing units,
and therefore no net change on housing affordability (ibid). The rise in housing prices was
attributed to increase in demand.
Smart growth and job creation
Compact development may benefit job creation in the local economy. One study of
metropolitan areas with smart growth measures in place concluded that more construction
related jobs were created and than in areas without growth management policies (Mattera
& LeRoy, 2003).
76
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
There is debate over whether and how compactness would affect the cost of infrastructure
and community services to taxpayers. This issue is addressed in more detail under the
section 3.2.1 on density.
Quantitative relations for compact development
• From 30% to 60% of commuters use public transit to central location use transit,
compared to 5% tol5%utilization of public transit to dispersed locations(T. Litman &
Steele, 2012).
• The most sprawling metropolitan regions experience an increase in extreme heat
events that more than doubles the incidence for compact metropolitan regions
(between 1956 and 2005) (Stone, et al., 2010)
Best practices and unintended consequences
Despite the debate over the magnitude of market demand for compact development, the
notion that a compact city form is consistent with principles of sustainability is rarely
questioned. Michael Neuman (2005) points to the many professional and political
institutions that support this compact city design, including the Urban Land Institute, the
American Planning Association, the President's Council on Sustainable Development, the
European Environment Agency, the United Nations, and the National Research Council.
The role of compact development in achieving sustainability at a regional scale is relatively
unexplored. Neuman (2005) notes that many insular compact developments are still
primarily residential, and are often exist at the periphery of established metropolitan areas.
This growth in extraurban satellite communities requires commuting to work and to shop,
and may be an enabling factor for promoting sprawl. Excessive growth restriction in a
growing area can spur leapfrog development, which bypasses the buffer area and shifts
development into a neighboring jurisdiction. This can lead to even longer commutes with
concomitant increases in vehicle emissions.
When regions develop in cooperation, they may be able to limit leapfrog development and
restrict expansion to the periphery of a densely populated area. Infill developments
between the central city and this peripheral development may sometimes be more densely
populated than the areas around them, challenging the traditional notion of sprawl. Sprawl
is in part defined through time. If disperse, leapfrog development quickly gives way to
dense infill, it may not be sprawl, but simply the process of dense growth into new areas.
Whereas a moderately compact city may be consistent with the concept of sustainable
urbanism, it's also been noted "There is no such thing as a sustainable city (Neuman, 2005)."
To the degree that cities rely on the countryside for resources, food, and trade, cities and
rural areas are interdependent. The well being of one cannot be readily or accurately
extricated from the other.
77
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3.3 Impacts of Land Use Types on Sustainability
3.3.1 Residential
Housing consumes land, energy, water, and produces GHG emissions. Housing is also an
important contributor to human well being, although it can be a means to create and
perpetuate segregation. Where one lives determines accessibility to a host of services,
amenities, education, jobs, and more. Housing accounts for approximately 4% to7% of all
the total land area in the United States, when including rural residential lots (Emrath, 2006).
As such, it is an important contributor to the conversion of open space and agricultural land
to developed uses. From 1980 to 2009, the number of residential buildings has steadily
increased from 81.6 to 113.6 million units (EIA, 2012). Along with an increase in the
number of residential buildings, the size of the residential buildings has markedly increased.
For example, homes built since 1990 are 27% larger than those built in previous decades
(EIA, 2012). However the trends in housing are not unidirectional. Although the number
and size of residences has steadily increased, the median lot size has steadily decreased. As
an example, the median lot size in 2009 was 0.26 acres compared to 0.42 acres in 1991, a
38% decrease in land area (BOC, 1991, 2009). This indicates a gradual increase in housing
density, perhaps an indication of the increasing demand for more traditional neighborhood
developments. In fact, more evidence supports the idea that smart growth principles are
becoming more popular. In nearly 75% of large metropolitan areas between 2000 to 2009,
infill housing development (new housing in previously developed areas) grew as a share of
all new housing (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012b).
However, smaller lots may not actually indicate a smaller per capita footprint as homes are
sheltering fewer people on average. Over several decades, the average number of people
per household has steadily decreased since the 1940s although the average has markedly
leveled off, potentially due to the economic downturn and the shift to multi-generational
households (BOC, 2011). And though infill housing is becoming more prevalent, Greenfield
home construction still accounts for the majority of all new homes on almost all cities (US
Environmental Protection Agency, 2012b).
Residential resource consumption
Housing is an important contributor to land consumption, energy usage, GHG emissions,
and water usage. A study based in Toronto on 1990 data found that residential
buildings accounted for 31% of all GHG emissions (VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007). A model
based on Australian cities estimates that 40% of all water related energy usage in a city is
used by the residential sector, with 31% going towards heating water (Kenway, Lant, &
Priestley, 2011).
From 1980 to 2009, average household energy consumption has surprisingly decreased
from 114 to 89.6 million Btu (EIA, 2012). At the same time, electricity used for electronics
and consumer appliances has markedly increased. The share of residential electricity used
78
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
for electronics and consumer appliances has almost doubled in the last three decades,
increasing from 17% to 31% (EIA, 2012). Although home sizes and electronic use has
increased, improvements to the building envelop (e.g., better insulation, double-pane
windows), energy efficient home heating/cooling systems, as well as improvements to the
appliances used in residences (e.g., water heaters, refrigerators) have decreased the
average energy consumption per home.
Technology improvements have also narrowed the energy efficiency gap between
multifamily housing and single family housing since 1980. Single family homes built since
1985 use only 20% more energy per capita than multifamily, and continue to get more
efficient (Holden & Norland, 2005). Residential water use has also become more efficient.
Despite population growth in Toronto, residential solid waste and wastewater decreased in
absolute terms between 1987 and 1999 (Sahely, Dudding, & Kennedy, 2003). Such rapid
increases in efficiency lead some to believe that with more technological advances, single
family homes may become just as sustainable a choice if set into a decentralized, but
compact context that help reduce trips and trip distances (Holden & Norland, 2005).
Residential land use impacts on water quality and quantity
However energy efficiency does not tell the whole story. Residential uses also consume a
large portion of the nation's land, increasing impervious surface cover. In this way
residential land use significantly contributes to urban heat island formation and surface
water pollution and runoff. Perhaps counter intuitively, low density single family style
housing, despite providing more lawns and trees, results in more impervious surface cover
for the same occupancy capacity than higher density housing (Stone, 2004). Furthermore,
the ubiquitous lawns exact a price in water quantity and quality. Lawns require irrigation,
which drives up water usage, increases runoff, and reduces the community's capacity to
manage flooding (A. Schneider, et al., 2012). Researchers estimate that the projected rate
of urbanization in the US Corn Belt cities is causing an expansion of turf grass in residential
areas that leads to an increase in runoff of 15-48% (ibid). In addition, GHG emissions
produced are significantly lower in residential areas in the city center than in suburban
areas, when accounting for per capita transportation emissions and building electricity use,
the report finds that overall, residential areas in the city center produce significantly less
(VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007).
Residential land use also impact water supplies by impacting both ground water and surface
water. USGS (Metz, 2007) found that detections of volatile organic contaminants increased
with population near water supply wells. Generally the highest detections were in
residential land use areas. Potential impacts from septic systems, lawn and garden fertilizer,
large scale pesticide application, animal waste, sanitary and combined sewer overflows,
storm water runoff, vehicle washing, small quantity chemical use, and above and below
ground storage tanks highlight potentially problematic issues related to land use (US
Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a). When contaminated runoff flows into
79
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
recreational water bodies, illness rates rise among beach users (Colford et al., 2012; Heaney
et al., 2012; Wade et al., 2010).
Residential segregation
The spatial segregation of neighborhoods by socioeconomic divisions is increasingly
common and a major concern for community public health advocates (L. M. Anderson, et al.,
2003). In 1990, about 18% of poor metropolitan residents lived in areas with at least a 40%
poverty rate, reflecting a high degree of segregation (ibid). Residential segregation causes
health disparities among races and classes. Segregation concentrates disadvantages
through constraining socioeconomic advancement (education, employment, home
ownership), increasing exposure to crime, environmental hazards, and inferior public
services, including health care services (Acevedo-Garcia, et al., 2008; Ahmed, Mohammed,
& Williams, 2007; J. D. Brender, Zhan, Suarez, Langlois, & Moody, 2006; Dark, Williams, &
Barnett, 2004; White, Haas, & Williams, 2012; Williams et al., 2012).
To combat residential, racial, and economic segregation, local and federal government
agencies use approaches including rental vouchers, mixed income housing projects, and
affordable housing quotas. Rental vouchers or other tenant based financial assistance has
clear research supporting the benefits to tenants including reduced exposure to crime and
neighborhood disorder. Research with control groups is needed to properly evaluate the
effectiveness of mixed income housing projects (L. M. Anderson, et al., 2003). However,
there is evidence to suggest that reducing neighborhood poverty impacts resident well
being. Data from a randomized housing mobility program, Moving to Opportunity, has
found that moving from a high poverty neighborhood to lower poverty one improves
physical and mental health and subjective well being over the course of 10 to 15 years
(Ludwig et al., 2012). However the move did not improve residents' economic self-
sufficiency.
Housing affordability
Housing affordability is a concern for many households therefore efforts to desegregate
housing must be sensitive not to increase property values to such a degree that it reduces
the supply of affordable homes. In 1997,14% of U.S. households were classified as having
critical housing needs, meaning they spent more than 50% of their income on housing, or
lived in very poor conditions (National Association of Home Builders, 2001).
See sections on Neighborhood Density and Mixed-uses for information on how the form of
neighborhoods and their amenities impact human well being.
Community budget impacts of residential land use
As opposed to commercial and industrial development, residential development is almost
always revenue negative for local governments. Reigning in the costs to be closer to
revenue neutral is a powerful way for local communities to balance budgets. The American
Farmland Trust estimates that the median cost of servicing residential uses in the U.S. is
80
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
$1.15 for every dollar of revenue (AKRF Inc, 2011). Areas such as Queen Anne's County, MD
that are predominately more traditional denser single family neighborhoods have median
service costs closer to $1.02 per dollar of revenue. In this context, residential density is still
low; the American Farmland Trust compares figures for between 0.2 and 4.5 units per acre
(ibid). The National Association of Home Builders confirms this general sentiment, saying
that "because they are built at higher densities, multifamily homes reduce local
governments' capital and operating costs." A 1973 study estimated that, in British
Columbia, multifamily homes at 30-units-per-acre required almost 70% less in annual public
service expenditures than single-family homes at three-units-per-acre, at $1,647 and
$2,361, respectively (National Association of Home Builders, 2001).
Quantitative relations for residential uses
• Residential buildings accounted for 31% of all GHG emissions in Toronto
(VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007)
• 40% of all water related energy usage in a city is used by the residential sector, with
31% going towards heating water (Kenway, et al., 2011)
• The median cost of servicing residential uses in the U.S. is $1.15 for every dollar of
revenue; moderately denser residential areas (4.5 units per acre) bring service costs
to around $1.02 per dollar of revenue (AKRF Inc, 2011).
• Expansion of residential turf grass in growing midwest cities may require an
additional 8-105million m3 of water use annually and increase runoff by 15-48%
(Schneider et al., 2012)
• A decline in neighborhood poverty of 13 percentage point "increases subjective
well-being by an amount equal to the gap in subjective well-being between people
whose annual incomes differ by $13,000" (Ludwig et al., 2012)
Best practices and unintended consequences
The role of zoning and other governmental involvement in the creation of suburban sprawl
is controversial. Some claim that the federal government subsidizes low density housing
(Danielsen, et al., 1999). Others point out that zoning for minimum lot sizes contributes to
forcing a dispersed development pattern in many suburban and rural areas (J Levine, 2005).
An alternative explanation is that development patterns reflect consumer preferences
rather than regulatory mandates (Kopits, et al., 2012).
A study in Maryland compared actual lot size to the allowable density under zoning
regulations and reported that average lot sizes were typically well below allowable densities
and sometimes even less dense than permitted (Kopits, et al., 2012). In other words, rather
than building at the maximum density allowed in the area, which would indicate that
regulations were artificially keeping densities low, most actual densities were lower than
allowed. However, the authors acknowledge this effect was less pronounced in the low
density zoned areas. They conclude that the willingness to pay for larger lot sizes has
decreased by 17% between 1985 and 2000 in the study area (ibid).
81
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
The authors also report that many consumers are willing to accept the tradeoff of smaller
lot sizes for larger house sizes. This research suggests that if communities wish to increase
residential compactness, merely raising the allowable density may be insufficient, and
minimum density zones may be necessary. Consumers generally appear to prefer larger lots
in suburban settings, there is unmet demand for higher density transit-accessible housing,
and good evidence that even those who initially prefer lower density housing, will accept
higher densities when accompanied by amenities such as pocket parks, street trees, and
shorter commutes (Danielsen, et al., 1999).
A number of residential zoning and regulatory reforms are advocated to promote well-being
in disadvantaged groups, including the elderly. Reforms to allow accessible living spaces and
elder cottages (for elderly parents to move close to adult children for care) promote aging
in place and can reduce the necessity for nursing home care (Kochtitzky, Freeland, & Yen,
2011).
Adopting a number of residential land use changes can mitigate adverse environmental
consequences at a regional scale such as surface heat islands by up to 40% (Stone &
Norman, 2006). Other environmentally favorable land-use changes include the following:
1. reducing average lawn sizes by at least 25%, allowing for more compact
development and less impervious infrastructure such as roads,
2. minimizing impervious surfaces by building multi-story buildings to minimize the
building footprint, reducing required yard setbacks, and adopting narrow lot
frontages to reduce driveway length, and
3. plant shade trees. These actions, in combination with green infrastructure such as
highly reflective driveway materials or driveway runners (leaving middle sections
unpaved), can reduce impervious surface cover on lots by up to 30%, without
requiring any changes to house size or design (ibid).
Strategies to protect source water from contamination associated with residential
development include providing designated green space and reducing impervious cover
(Source Water Collaborative, 2009a). Over use of resources can be discouraged by setting
water and septic rates consistent with the actually cost of water and sewage treatment to
state and federal standards. That is, the cost of clean, safe drinking water and waste
disposal will be passed on to the consumer.
Among a series of community actions, land use regulations and incentives can be tools for
delineating wellhead protection zones, riparian buffers, nitrate loading regulations and
storm water management ordinances (Source Water Collaborative, 2009b). Smart growth
and brownfields redevelopment can be used to encourage compact development patterns
in areas where impacts to source waters will be minimized. The section on Neighborhood
Scale Synthesis includes discussion of neotraditional development, transit-oriented
development, clustering, and other conservation measures.
82
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3.3.2 Commercial
Commercial land encompasses a wide variety of uses from retail and office buildings to
manufacturing, lodging, golf courses, cinemas, and ski resorts. In addition, these uses take
many forms, from multistory office buildings, to factories, big box stores or even open
recreational areas. Consequently, standard impacts and practices for development are
difficult to summarize. Nonetheless, we present some of the key impacts, issues, and
considerations regarding commercial land use.
Commercial construction impacts
Construction of new commercial developments carries the same impacts to the
environment as residential and civic construction projects. These include deforestation, soil
disturbance, increasing impervious surfaces, loss of habitat for native flora and fauna, and
changes to river and stream morphology. Adding commercial uses through infill
developments or by adding density to existing areas can prevent land conversion from
natural to human uses. In addition to the standard impacts of new development, specific
commercial uses may have added impacts. For example, ski slope development may require
snow-making, machine grading, and other processes beyond the standard impacts. These
processes can in turn increase sediment loads, destroy migration pathways, promote soils
erosions, increase water temperatures and alter the stream flow and stability of stream
banks (David, Bledsoe, Merritt, & Wohl, 2009).
Commercial energy consumption
Commercial land uses consume a significant portion of the energy in a city, about on par
with residential consumption. A study based in Toronto on 1990 data found that
commercial buildings accounted for 30% of all GHG emissions, compared to 31% for
residential buildings and 9% for industrial ones (VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007). A model
based on Australian cities estimated that 14% of all water related energy usage in a city is
used by the commercial sector, compared to 40% by the residential sector (Kenway, et al.,
2011). Since estimates can vary by location, technology, and practice these numbers are
only rough estimates that provide a starting point for further comparison and verification.
Physical activity and commercial land uses
The presence of commercial physical activity centers, such as physical fitness facilities and
YMCAs, is associated with higher levels of physical activity and lower BMI among youth who
live nearby (Slater, et al., 2010). Vigorous physical exercise increased by 6.5% and sports
participation increased by 8% among youth aged 4 to 16 years of age in neighborhoods with
access to physical activity facilities in neighborhoods without confounding physical
disorders such homeless persons, dilapidated buildings, or security barriers (ibid). However
the commercial use need not be a gym to have an impact.
Most retail and employment centers attract walking and biking trips and are therefore
measured as positive elements on most walkability scales (Adams et al., 2009). The
83
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
presence of commercial land use in a neighborhood is positively associated with bicycling
for transportation (Winters, Brauer, Setton, &Teschke, 2010). In downtown areas,
evidence suggests that the proximity and density of commercial land use fosters greater use
of urban greenways (Coutts, 2009); however, conflicting results also exist. Commercial
development appears to increase use of parks and greenways for walking; however busy,
difficult to cross streets and large parking lots discourage walking (Kaczynski, et al., 2010).
Other studies have elaborated on the impacts of the commercial design noting that the
presence of commercial uses can inhibit social interaction in residential areas. This effect
can be overcome by designing commercial properties to create pedestrian friendly
commercial areas such as wide sidewalks and street facing stores, in lieu of surface parking
lots (Wood, et al., 2010).
The trend during the post war years was for less walking access to commercial destinations.
In a study of five U.S. cities, pedestrian access to commercial uses from home declined
rapidly between the 1940s and the 1970s (Knaap, et al., 2007). However, more recently,
some cities have begun reversing this trend. In particular, Maricopa County, AZ and
Portland, OR, have both increased the percent of homes within % of a mile to commercial
uses, though still not to the portion in the 1940s and 50s (ibid).
Economic development through commercial land uses
Communities may be motivated to zone for new commercial development in an effort to
increase local job opportunities and generate tax revenues. There is debate over the
effectiveness of this strategy.
Several studies indicate that commercial infill development is more effective for economic
development than zoning new areas (AKRF Inc, 2011; Mattera & LeRoy, 2003). As a case in
point, a fiscal study of Queen Anne's County, MD, emphasizes that increasing the land area
zoned as commercial use is not necessarily the most effective way to increase revenue from
commercial areas. To the contrary, the authors asserted that the county would better serve
the community through infill and occupying vacant buildings (AKRF Inc, 2011). The rationale
was that dispersed commercial development has the potential to undermine existing
commercial zones. Furthermore, costs rise disproportionately to deliver services to
dispersed areas.
The American Farmland Trust estimates that the cost of servicing commercial and industrial
uses ranges from $0.04 to $1.04 per dollar spent to each dollar of revenue gained.
Moreover, these low returns on investment are subject to unpredictable variables such as
the density, distribution, time of year, and opportunities for economies of scale in the
community (ibid). Denser commercial areas tend to have service costs at the lower end of
the range. Further advantage of the infill approach is attributed to avoiding conversion of
dwindling agricultural land and open space to commercial purpose.
84
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
In addition to costing a city less, commercial buildings in denser, mixed-use areas may
stimulate higher property values and therefore generate more tax revenue (Smart Growth,
International City/County Management, & United States. Environmental Protection, 2002).
Commercial property values are also increased by proximity to rail stations (R. Cervero,
Duncan, &Trb, 2002).
Quantitative relations for commercial uses
• 14% of all water related energy usage in a city is used by the commercial sector
(Kenway et al, 2011)
• Commercial buildings account for about 30% of all GHG emissions (VandeWeghe &
Kennedy, 2007) and 14% of all water related energy usage (Kenway et a I, 2011).
• The cost of servicing commercial and industrial uses ranges from $0.04 to $1.04 per
dollar spent to each dollar of revenue gained. These low returns on investment are
subject to unpredictable variables such as the density, distribution, time of year, and
the opportunity for economies of scale in the
community (AKRF Inc, 2011).
• Best practices and unintended
consequences
While commercial uses are diverse, mixing
commercial uses with residential and civic uses
may be a best practice for return on
investment. A mix of uses has been shown to
increase retail sales and retail visibility. Mixed
use centers have the potential to reduce
individual commute times by increasing the
jobs-to-housing balance, thereby promoting
both walking and use of public transit. From
the perspective of local governments, dense
mixed-use properties generate significantly
more property tax revenue than single-use
commercial centers and revenues exceed the
cost of providing infrastructure service.
3.3.3 Industrial
The protection of communities from
potentially harmful releases of industrial
chemicals and other pollutants to air, water,
and soil is generally assured through state
compliance and enforcement of the federal
regulations (see Appendix A). Thus, impacts of
Box 17. EPA Product Highlight
A collection of 15 papers on
disproportionate health risks has
been published by SHC Task
2.2.3.5 in a supplemental issue of
American Journal of Public
Health. The supplemental issue
resulted from an EPA sponsored
symposium in 2010 on factors
leading to disproportionate
health risks. Some of the articles
most relevant to land use address
the health effects and
disproportionate exposure to
noxious land uses and health
impact assessments as a process
to explicitly consider equity in
community decision-making.
Several of these papers have
been cited throughout this land
use synthesis paper.
http://aiph.aphapublications.ora/
toc/ajph/101/Sl
85
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
industrial land use are generally not a
community issue.
Nonetheless, there are practices recommended
for communities to address potential concerns.
One is "performance zoning" also known as
"effects-based planning," to incorporates
performance standards into zoning laws and
ordinances. Another practice is that of
"community health risk assessmentswhich can
be required as part of the permitting approval
process for new construction.
The linking of GIS-based simulations to
community health risk management has also been promoted (Willis & Keller, 2007).
Disproportionate health effects
There is evidence of public health impacts due to toxic air emissions. A study based in the
Los Angeles air basin found that, assuming a lifetime of exposure, the air toxics in the area
would result in 1400 excess cancer cases per million residents(South Coast Air Quality
Management, 2000). Birth defects and other adverse health outcomes have been
associated with residential proximity to hazardous wastes sites, industrial sites, cropland
with pesticide applications, highly trafficked roads, nuclear power plants, and gas stations
or repair shops. In particular, these industrial uses have been associated with increased risk
of oral clefts (J. D. Brender et al., 2006) perinatal mortality, neural tube defects, congenital
anomalies, and childhood cancers(Jean D. Brender, Maantay, & Chakraborty, 2011).
This public health burden from proximity to industrial plants disproportionately affects
the poor (socioeconomically disadvantaged) and minorities, who are more likely to reside
near industrial facilities. Many studies have identified vulnerable demographic groups who
are more likely to be clustered near hazardous land uses(Abel & White, 2011; Maantay,
2001). One study in Seattle comparing the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) sites to low
socioeconomic populations and gentrifying areas found vulnerable populations and toxic
release sites converged in the same locations (Abel & White, 2011). In addition, although 11
new toxic release facilities opened during the study period, none of them opened in
gentrifying areas.
Proximity increases the probability that individuals more experience adverse health
outcomes; however, proximity and exposure do not always align (Jean D. Brender, et al.,
2011; Chakraborty, Maantay, & Brender, 2011). In addition, sometimes effects are only
seen in certain vulnerable populations. Additional research could help to delineate spatial
components and exposure thresholds for different populations and contaminants
associated with industrial land uses. Such information could help guide city planners to
Box 18. Industrial Ecosystem
Toolkit is being developed by
Ohio State University through a
grant from the EPA to help
industries reduce solid waste
through collaborative industrial
networks.
http://www.resiHence.osu.edu/
CFR-site/eco-flow. htm
\ J
86
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
making zoning and siting decisions to minimize health effects from the high-risk land uses
cited above. For example, establishing a buffer zone around industrial parks and other
noxious land uses may improve community health.
Finally, disproportionate geographic impacts on health are persistent. Jason Corburn has
emphasized the growing recognition of the primary importance of "place" as a driver of
public health and human well-being. His concept of "place" is meant to encompass not only
the built environment, but the social one as well (Corburn, 2013). For example,
improvements in healthcare services may not be able to effect lasting health improvements
if residents return to the place where exposure occurred and continues to occur.
Brownfield redevelopment
Brownfield redevelopment of abandoned industrial sites is potentially an economical way
for communities to convert abandoned industrial land into community assets. Cleanup is
sometimes required.
Barriers to redevelopment can arise because if residual contamination, unknown remedial
costs, unpaid property taxes, or the stigma of previous contamination. These concerns can
promote urban sprawl if development of previously undeveloped parcels is seen as less
expensive and more expedient.
Federal and state brownfields programs are designed to promote reclamation and
repurposing of previously used land to commercial use.
Examples include former industrial plants reused for highway interchanges, park and ride
lots for commuter train service, and for mixed-use development (Agency, 1999; De Sousa,
2013; US Environmental Protection Agency, 2012a).
Gas stations and adjacent contaminated properties have been reclaimed and redeveloped
for a variety of purposes, including the following: A biofuels station (US Environmental
Protection Agency, 2007a), community gathering spaces, college classrooms, and housing
(US Environmental Protection Agency, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2012a), a community food
bank (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2008c), a community welcome center (US
Environmental Protection Agency, 2002b), part of a federal reserve bank (US Environmental
Protection Agency, 2007b), an events center in Reno, Nevada (US Environmental Protection
Agency, 2006b), an organic farm (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003), and many
others.
Brownfields redevelopment facilitates the reintroduction into commerce of formerly
contaminated sites. These sites provide an opportunity for in-fill development that
prevents sprawl, fosters sustainable development using smart growth principles, and can
support business development and job creation.
87
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3.3.4 Agriculture
Agricultural production accounts for nearly 51 percent of the U.S. land base: conversion of
agricultural land to other purposes has the potential to impact food production and the
economy. Other valued resources can also be jeopardized-wildlife habitats, bucolic
landscapes, open space, and the perpetuation of farm culture as a way of life and as a
national heritage (ERS, 2012b).
Urban expansion is consuming former agricultural land at an accelerating rate (American
Farmland Trust, 2007). In the Midwest, total annual crop production is expected to drop by
8% to 16% by 2030 due to urban expansion and loss of arable land (A. Schneider, et al.,
2012). Agricultural land use impacts the environment, human wellbeing, and the economy
in many ways, both beneficial and not.
Crop production helps ensure food security and rural livelihoods, sequesters carbon, and
provides some wildlife habitat and aesthetic appeal, and is a significant component of
national exports. It also reduces water quality and quantity, can contribute to invasive
species, and in some cases, may perpetuate income inequality.
Crop production and animal husbandry are both fundamental aspects of agriculture. The
following section addresses crop production, which have different considerations than
those of confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), which generate concerns for odors,
sanitation, and environmental justice (Mirabelli, Wing, Marshall, & Wilcosky, 2006).
Agriculture, water quality, and hydrology
Agricultural practices are inherently water intensive. Fertilization and tillage affect surface
and subsurface hydrology and water quality. Runoff from agricultural uses contributes to
high levels of phosphorous, nitrogen, and sediment in receiving waters. Excess nutrient
loading is a key cause of degradation to fresh water habitat and water quality (Havens &
Gawlik, 2005; Hogan, et al., 2012; Mueller-Warrant et al., 2012; Wardrop et al., 2011).
Over the past century, agricultural drainage solutions have caused cumulative changes to
the surrounding landscape including broad declines in sensitive aquatic species (Blann, et al.,
2009).
Mitigating practices for excess nutrients are evident. Over the past two decades, farm
practices have moved to achieve lower application rates and reduce reliance on pesticides
and fertilizers. For example, from 2004 to 2010, fertilizer consumption fell from 23 million
short tons to 21 million short tons (Osteen & Jessica Gottlieb, 2012). Irrigation efficiency is
improving (ibid).
Despite these favorable changes, the water quality impacts of agriculture remain an
important environmental challenge, in part because of the inherent difficulty of regulating
and managing non-point source occurring through runoff.
88
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Beyond the potential for adverse effects of agricultural runoff on aquatic ecosystems,
agriculture is also associated with changes to diversity of plant species beyond the
monoculture of crop species. A higher incidence of nonnative plant species is characteristic
of agricultural land (Decker, et al., 2012).
Agriculture and natural resources
Agricultural land use has been linked to depletion of water resources and consumption of
energy reserves (Lobao & Stofferahn, 2008) as well as increasing carbon emissions as a
result of deforestation (Younger, Morrow-Almeida, Vindigni, & Dannenberg, 2008). In 2005,
agricultural land use contributed 10% to 12% of anthropogenic carbon emissions
worldwide; 80% of these are from livestock production (ibid).
The extent to which large-scale, industrialized farming consumes or saves energy compared
to traditional family farms has been studied (Lobao & Stofferahn, 2008) but is probably a
moot point when considering the need to increase food supply to meeting anticipated
increases in for food supply.
Agricultural services
Agricultural land use has environmental benefits as well, particularly when compared to
more intensive uses. Farmland provides ecosystem services in addition to food. Though
agriculture stores less carbon than natural vegetation, it does provide some carbon
sequestration, and this service can be augmented though practices that increase soil
organic carbon (Morgan et al., 2010). The Ecosystem Portfolio Model shows that converting
agriculture to urban, industrial, and extractive uses lowers metrics of ecological value
overall (Hogan, et al., 2012).
Food security
Food security is an essential element of human wellbeing, and one that depends on long-
term land use planning to ensure adequate fertile land, water quantity, and water quality.
Communities struggle with the best ways to achieve this goal while minimizing undesirable
tradeoffs.
Agricultural land is valued aesthetically for its rural countryside charm as well as for its role
in slowing growth and reducing development (Heimlich & Anderson, 2001). However since
the most productive agricultural lands are also those most desired for suburban
development, competition can occur between the goals of rural charm, food production,
rural livelihoods, economic development, population growth, and conservation, all of which
have multiple intersecting tradeoffs. Several tools are that are designed to help
communities weigh alternative scenarios and evaluate consequences of various choices.
Farm employment
Agriculture, forestry, and mining remain important sectors in some rural areas; however,
service and retail industries have accounted for most job growth in rural America over the
89
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
past few decades. During the Depression of the 1930s, the rural and farm economies in the
United States were largely synonymous, as those rural residents not working on a farm
either provided direct support services to those on the farm or ranch or worked for
businesses that provided services to the farm sector.
As of 2007, 5.9 percent (1.5 million) of rural (non-metropolitan) workers were employed in
agriculture, with a somewhat smaller share of workers employed in closely related
industries, such as agricultural services, processing, marketing, and inputs (ERS, 2009). The
current rural economy is far more complicated. Farming now ranks behind manufacturing,
construction, retail trade, health services, and Government as source of rural jobs (based on
data from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis). In terms of
economic dependence, farming is second only to manufacturing as the dominant activity in
industry-dependent counties (ERS, 2012a).
The agriculture industry remains a primary economic driver in some rural areas. In North
Carolina, it is estimated to add $32.1 billion in value to the economy and employs 120,000
people (The Trust for Public Land, 2011). Agriculture may become increasingly important as
ethanol production supplies more energy resources as well. Agricultural land may become a
large source of biomass for biofuel. A report by the California Energy Commission estimated
that about 30% of material for biofuels in the state could come from agriculture (California
Energy Commission, 2005).
Industrial farming and socio-economic well-being
Farming is not always a force for economic prosperity, and the nature of the impact may
depend upon the type and scale of the enterprise. A comprehensive review of the literature
on the impacts of industrialized farming (defined by both the scale and type of organization)
between 1930 and 2007 found that in 75% of the 51 studies, the impacts on socio-economic
well-being, social fabric, and the environment were negative (Lobao & Stofferahn,
2008).The remaining 22% of studies reported mixed impacts or benign effects.
Large-scale industrialized farming was sometimes associated with a positive impact on
community income. In the majority of studies, however, industrial farming was associated
with lower incomes for selected populations, greater income inequality, greater poverty, or
higher overall unemployment rates (ibid). Industrial farming has also been linked to more
indirect impacts on the social fabric including a decline in population size, social disruption
including an increase in crime rates, lower civic participation, less democratic decision
making, and reduced or lower quality public services (ibid).
Aesthetic impacts ofCAFOs
Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) also have impacts that are of interest to
land use decision makers in particular. First, the operations have negative aesthetic impacts,
such as noxious smells, beyond the health and environmental impacts, which impact
adjacent properties. Second, these intensive agricultural operations tend to be sited in low-
90
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
income and minority communities, potentially creating and environmental justice situation
of disproportionate exposures of vulnerable populations. In a study of North Carolina
middle schools, schools with greater than 47% of students receiving reduced-price lunches,
a common proxy for poverty, were located much closer to swine CAFOs. These high-poverty
schools were located at a mean of 4.9 miles from a CAFO, while lower poverty schools were
a mean of 10.8 miles (Mirabelli, et al., 2006).
CAFOs and jobs, property values, income, and inequality
CAFOs have emerged as an efficient and cost effective way to produce large amounts of
livestock for food production. CAFOs also provide jobs and income to local communities.
From a macroeconomic perspective; however, some of the positive effects on employment
may be offset by the negative effects of CAFOS on surrounding property values. Home
values have been shown to be reduced by 3 to 10% by the presence of CAFOs at a distance
of 1 mile (Milla, Thomas, & Ansine, 2005).
In a meta-analysis of studies on the community impacts of industrial farming 82% percent
of studies reviewed showed detrimental impacts relative to smaller farms and family owned
farms reflected "deterioration of neighborly relations," decreased retail trade, less diverse
retail, and less civic participation (Lobao & Stofferahn, 2008).
A Workgroup on Community and Socioeconomic Issues sponsored by the University of Iowa
and the NIEHS reviewed the impacts of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) on
the health and sustainability of agricultural communities. The workgroup recommended
several policy changes including "a more stringent process for issuing permits for CAFOs,
limiting animal density per watershed, enhancing local control, and mandating
environmental impact statements (ibid)." Tools to identify locations for CAFOs that
minimize impacts on sensitive groups would be helpful here.
Quantitative relations for agricultural uses
• Agricultural land use accounts for 10 to 12% of anthropogenic carbon emissions
worldwide (as of 2005); 80% of these emissions are from livestock production
(Younger et al., 2008)
• Industrial farming is associated with lower incomes for select populations, higher
income inequality, greater poverty, higher unemployment rates, lower civic
participation, and less democratic political decision making were evident according
to a literature review of 51 studies (Lobao & Stofferahn, 2008)
91
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Agriculture could provide about 30% of feedstock for biofuels (California Energy
Commission, 2005) Home values may be reduced from 3 to 10% by the presence of
CAFOs at a distance of 1 mile (Milla, et al., 2005)
• CAFOs are more likely to be located close to schools serving high poverty
communities (Mirabelli, et al., 2006).
Best Practices and unintended consequences
While some farming practices (e.g., excess fertilization and over use of pesticides) can
degrade natural resources, USDA conservation programs offer farmers a range of options
for assistance with conservation that can contribute to land preservation and land
retirement programs and for land in production.
In rural agricultural communities, planning practice has been to cluster residential and
commercial areas so as to preserve agricultural land, minimize development impacts on
agricultural land and open space, and reduce exposure to pesticides (California Governor's
Office of Planning and Research, 2010). A guide developed for the Rhode Island Department
of Environmental Management provides concrete strategies for communities to incentivize
landowners to maintain working farms and forests (Horsley Witten Group Inc, 2012). The
report identifies case studies, supporting zoning and regulations, and specific performance
standards.
Other successful practices include the transfer or purchase of development rights and to
compensate owners to forego offers of purchase (Nelson, 2012).
Conservation practices sometimes have
unintended consequences for residents
within the region. Evidence suggests
that property values are higher in areas
with more agricultural land under
conservation protection; however, it is
not clear which specific elements drive
this response. Research is necessary to
determine whether and when
agricultural conservation policies will
raise property values to sufficiently to
have the unwanted effect of displacing
low socio-economic residents (Poor &
Brule, 2007).
3.3.5 Parkland and Open Space
Preserved natural areas make up a
significant proportion of our country's
land and impact sustainability in a
Box 19. EPA Product Highlight
A report synthesizing policy and
management tools for reducing
nutrients was produced by SHC task
3.3.1.2. The researchers concluded that
most successful approaches come from
flexible command and control
regulation of point sources, and that
current efforts are hampered largely by
the challenges of regulating non-point
source pollution, such as agricultural
runoff and atmospheric releases.
Successful locally applicable approaches
that were highlighted include working
with farmers to implement BMPs.
92
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
variety of ways. According to the United
Nations Environment Programme, federally
protected areas comprise about 27% of the
land area in the United States. In addition,
many states and local jurisdictions maintain
preserved natural areas. Parkland provides
ecosystem services, provides an opportunity
for physical activity, and generates revenue
through ecotourism. Note that in this section
we discuss large undeveloped natural areas,
including preserved land, state and national
parks, and peri-urban forests and open space.
Community parks are discussed under the
section titled "Access to parks and greenspace."
Ecosystem services of Parkland
Preserved natural areas serve a critical role in
providing ecosystem services including
groundwater purification, good air quality,
storm and flood control, biodiversity, and
habitat connectivity.
Forested land near cities improves the air
quality of nearby urban areas by filtering
common air pollutants. A study based around Mexico City estimated that a 40,000 hectare
peri-urban forested park reduced the city's air concentrations of pollutants by
approximately 0.02% for CO, 1% for ozone, and 2% for PM10 (Baumgardner, Varela,
Escobedo, Chacalo, & Ochoa, 2012). The term peri-urban refers to natural areas
immediately adjacent to a developed area, typically outside the suburban zone (Tzoulas et
al., 2007)
Peri-urban forests not only benefit air quality, but can also help ease the urban heat island
effect. This is because forests increase humidity of the air due to evapotranspiration. In
extreme cases of deforestation, the loss of this service can cause aridity and desertification.
However, even at moderate scales, forest evapotranspiration provides a valuable service,
cooling the air temperature. In addition, urban tree cover provides shade, further cooling
the ambient air temperature. For this reason, trees in and near urban environments can
reduce the magnitude of the relief from the urban heat island effect (Manning, 2008).
Biotic integrity of Parkland
Minimum thresholds of forest cover to maintain biotic integrity and good ecological
conditions have tentatively been established using bird species data as an indicator. In
Box 20.
EPA Product Highlight
A peer reviewed report of
selected ecosystem services
provided by coastal wetlands of
the Laurentian Great Lakes was
produced by SHC Task 2.1.4.4.
The report reviews the evidence
for ecosystem services
produced by the coastal
wetlands of the Great Lakes
including carbon sequestration,
sport and commercial fish,
retaining sediments and wild
rice production. Their research
has highlighted a need we also
find: to identify quantitative
relationships between land use
decisions and the delivery of
ecosystem services.
93
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
developed areas, national, state, and local parkland and preserves can provide the
threshold levels of forest cover necessary. Excellent biotic integrity is maintained with at
least 82% forest cover. Poor biotic integrity begins at roughly 56% agricultural or
herbaceous cover and at roughly 39% residential or commercial cover (J. L. O'Connell,
Johnson, Smith, McMurry, & Haukos, 2012). Established thresholds such as these may be
valuable information for modelers as well as for land use planners to set land cover goals
for the region. The thresholds can also help determine which areas may be in borderline
condition and could be saved from poor condition or achieve excellent ecological condition
with relatively small investment or change in practice.
Physical Activity in Parkland
In addition to the ecosystem services that parks provide, they also provide an opportunity
for physical activity and may be able to encourage it with marketing. A study of federal
parks in California found that they provide physical activity opportunities for diverse groups
(Chavez, Winter, & Absher, 2008). In another study of US National Parks, five of the seven
national parks considered showed an increase in physical activity due to intervention
activities, which included print and electronic material that encouraged use of the parks
(Hoehner, et al., 2010).
The accessibility of state and national parks may vary by groups and be less accessible to
low socioeconomic groups in particular. One study found that "my financial situation" was
the second most commonly cited constraint to visiting undeveloped natural areas (UNAs)
(39%) after "my family and friends do not visit UNAs" at 42% (Chavez, et al., 2008).
Ecotourism. Although large protected parks and open space are primarily preserved to
protect biodiversity, habitat, and ecosystem goods and services, they can also provide
recreation and subsequent economic benefits to a community. Mulongoy and Chape (2004)
estimate that ecotourism in Canada and the United States has a value, respectively, of $237
and $370 billion in 1996 (Chavez et al., 2008).
Quantitative relations for parkland
• 82% forest cover maintains excellent to good biotic integrity for bird communities in
the central Appalachians (T. J. O'Connell, Jackson, & Brooks, 2000).
• Poor biotic integrity begins at roughly 56% agricultural or herbaceous cover and at
roughly 39% residential or commercial cover (ibid).
• A forested area of about 40,000 hectares near an urban center reduced the annual
concentrations of CO by 0.02%, of ozone (03) by 1%, and of PM10 by 2% in the city
(Baumgardner, et al., 2012)
• United States forests offset approximately 6% of U.S. C02 emissions (Turner &
Koerper, 1995).
94
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Best Practices and unintended consequences
Land banking is one of the most common practices used to preserve land for future
community needs. As the many benefits of parkland and large signature city parks are
increasingly recognized, it has become an effective way to preserve land for open space at
an affordable cost to a community.
Land banking started in the 1970s to manage and repurpose vacant or abandoned land due
to deindustrialization and suburbanization, and turn it to make a profit once property values
returned. However, the method has also been adopted as a way to preserve land for public
use against development and rising property values. Land banks, often managed by a
nonprofit or municipality, purchase land at current market rates. This approach is
particularly useful in areas that are expected to grow quickly, because land prices can
rapidly become too high for cities to purchase parkland. In addition to providing public
goods, this preserved land will increase nearby property values and tax revenues for the
community.
Because the success of land banking depends on timing and the availability of large parcels
of land, an alternative approach is to conserve land in smaller pieces while maintaining
connectivity crucial to home ranges and habitat of flora and fauna.
Growth controls or zoning restrictions are sometimes used in an attempt to slow the loss of
parkland adjacent to urbanized areas. However this may not always be effective. At least in
a study of Southern Indiana, the existence of county level zoning did not affect the
conversion of forest to urban uses (York and Munroe, 2010). This study did not isolate the
impact of the more restrictive growth controls, like urban growth boundaries, however, so
it is unclear to what extent these may be more successful.
The Trust for Public Land outlines a best practice methodology for periurban forest
management that they term the Community Forest Model which aims to preserve a
sustainable, permanent forest, while also ensuring community access to monetary and
nonmonetary forest services such as timber, recreation, and avoided costs of water
treatment (Lyman, Evans, & Mytar, 2011).
The ability to track and model land cover change and fragmentation is improving, opening
the possibility for new, more insightful decision-support tools. The University of Connecticut
has developed models that use satellite based land cover data to quantify and describe
forest and open space fragmentation, in addition to urban growth pattern and change
(Civco, Hurd, Wilson, Arnold, & Prisloe, 2002). With these advances, conservation planning
software has been developed to identify and prioritize preservation corridors that can
provide the most connectivity at the least cost (Carroll, McRae, & Brookes, 2012; La Greca,
La Rosa, Martinico, & Privitera, 2011). While this threshold has been established for natural
cover to maintain biotic integrity of forests, less is known for non-forested biomes.
Validation of software is also critical to enhance the utility of such software.
95
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
3.3.6 Roads
Roads, as a land use, have profound impacts on the landscape. Coffin (2007) estimates that
83% of the land area in the continental United States is within about 1 km of a roadway.
When considering the full sustainability impacts of roadways as a land use, one must
consider the impact of increasing the amount of land dedicated to this use, the impact of
what route a road follows, and the impacts of different roadway design and construction
elements. More on these topics may be found in the forthcoming SHC Theme 4 synthesis
paper on sustainable transportation (SHC 4.1.3), currently in preparation.
Habitat destruction and fragmentation from roads
Roads occupy a significant amount of land, and directly reduce and fragment habitat (Coffin,
2007). In addition to directly causing deforestation, road development spurs further
destruction of habitat by enabling and promoting new development. Roads impact
biodiversity and wildlife through fragmentation effects as well, including hindering
migration, dividing territories, separating breeding populations, and road kill (Haskell, 2000).
After impervious surfaces, roads, and the land fragmentation they cause, are one of the
most important stressors on aquatic ecosystems (M. Alberti, et al., 2007). Roads not only
add to impervious surface cover, but also increase runoff and sediment deposition to
streams and often lead to channel alteration of waterways.
Roads impact habitats and ranges for large mammals as well. In Florida, the primary source
of all mortality for large endangered vertebrates, such as panthers, black bears, deer, and
crocodiles, is motor vehicles (Coffin, 2007). Small mammals, insects, and "generalist"
species, roads, such as coyotes and foxes, can spread swiftly using roadway corridors. In
some cases, these corridors of migration can facilitate the spread of invasive species (ibid).
On top of the direct site-specific ecological impacts roads have, road networks have
cumulative region-wide impacts on the landscape and ecosystems. These effects are not yet
well understood and research to understand the differential ecosystem-level effects of
alternative road networks would be valuable (ibid).
Finally, there exists a tradeoff between well connected road networks, which in concert
with small blocks and a mix of uses, has been shown to increase walking and reduce driving,
and having a well connected landscape, which is important for many species survival.
Road construction and soil impacts
Conversion of natural land to developed land is inherently destructive to soils. Soils absorb
water, which can prevent flooding; provide habitat to support plant and animal life, and
contribute to vital ecological process of energy flow and nutrient cycling. Clear cutting land
to make room for buildings; paving land to create roads, streets, sidewalks, plazas; even the
compaction of earth from heavy equipment moving across unpaved land or, long-term foot
traffic all serve to diminish these inherent ecological functions of soil. Soil compaction
alone is highly detrimental to soil fertility. Compacted soils do not retain water, nor air
96
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
pockets essential for terrestrial plant roots to breathe and grow. When soil is compacted,
water no longer percolates through the soil to enable aquifer recharge or removal or
degradation of contaminants. Hydrologic processes can be entirely disrupted when soils are
disturbed, compacted or paved over.
Impervious surfaces from roads
Numerous studies have concluded that high levels of impervious surface area are
detrimental to the health of watersheds and the ecosystem services that they provide (T. R.
Schueler, 1994). Many elements of human settlement create impervious surfaces, however,
building footprints are often not the primary source. Roads, parking lots, driveways,
sidewalks, and other transportation-related land uses are the single largest contributors to
the overall impervious surfaces. The leading role of transportation land uses in producing
impervious surfaces is confirmed by the two studies showing that roads, parking lots, and
driveways account for 60 to 70% of overall imperviousness in metropolitan watersheds (City
of Olympia, 1995; Goetz et al., 2004). Transportation-related land uses represent an
especially high percentage of overall impervious surface area in suburban and rural regions.
In these locations, longer roads and longer driveways are needed to connect buildings that
are spaced farther apart and larger parking lots are needed to serve a more auto-dependent
population (T. R. Schueler, 1994).
Roads, like other impervious surfaces, increase stormwater runoff, which contributes to
higher peak flow in streams, increases flood vulnerability, and erodes channel banks (Coffin,
2007). In addition, road construction and maintenance introduces a variety of chemical
pollutants, such as pesticides, deicing salts, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and particulates,,
all of which are carried by runoff from roads to waterways (Kramer, 2013). For example,
runoff from heavily used asphalt parking places had toxic levels of zinc and copper in 97% of
samples, and contained detectable levels of motor oil in 89% of samples (Brattebo & Booth,
2003).
Relationship of roads to water infrastructure
The construction and configuration of roads significantly impact the provision of water and
wastewater infrastructure. However the best ways to coordinate the provision of roads and
the provision of water and wastewater infrastructure in a metropolitan area currently
represent a significant research gap. Water and wastewater pipes are typically buried
alongside major roadways. The development, and hence the need for new water and
wastewater service, often follows in reaction to roads built to serve an area. In fact, the
provision of efficient transportation infrastructure is a major driver of urban sprawl
(Burchfield, Overman, Puga, & Turner, 2006; R. H. Ewing, 2008), which has a significant
influence on the efficiency and sustainability of water and wastewater infrastructure.
Most U.S. urban areas start out with highly centralized water and wastewater systems,
which then expand as the urban area expands. As expansion occurs, new components of
97
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
the system are typically built as extensions of the existing network. Eventually, distributing
fresh water across vast distances from a centralized location and moving wastewater across
equally vast distances to a centralized collection point becomes both energy inefficient and
a physical strain on pipes to handle increased demand. Breaches, seepage, and backflow
are the unwanted consequences of infrastructure that develops in this manner.
Near-road air pollution
Though major roadways benefit users in the form of increased accessibility, users often
receive a disbenefit in the form of increased exposure to motor-vehicle-generated air
pollutants, which are estimated to affect 30-45% of the urban population of the United
States who live within several hundred meters of a high volume roadway (Y. Zhou & Levy,
2007). As summarized by Karner, Eisinger, and Niemeier (2010), concentrations of many
traffic-generated air pollutants can be highly elevated within the first 100-150 meters of a
large roadway, with concentrations above urban background levels as far as 600 meters
from the road. As a result, it may be unadvisable to develop certain buildings along
transportation routes where either a very large number of people or people who are
considered particularly susceptible to the effects of air pollution will be in close proximity to
vehicle emissions on a regular basis. However, the complexity of pollutant transport from
roadways, especially in urban environments, makes it difficult to identify what distances can
be considered "safe" and what road traffic volumes are a concern. In addition, land use
planners need to consider the benefits of accessibility and active transport by local
residents in addition to the health concerns related to air pollution exposures near roads.
Near-road air pollution includes emissions from the combustion of motor-vehicle fuel, fluids
that evaporate from vehicles' engines, chemicals that result from secondary reactions of
vehicle emissions in the atmosphere, and particles released into the air by the friction
exerted upon brakes, tires, and roadway surfaces. Amongst the numerous emissions that
are found in higher concentrations around heavily-traveled roadways are carbon monoxide
(CO), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and such particulate
matter components as black carbon (BC) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
Since 1970, U.S. emissions of NOx, PM10, and VOCs per VMT have been reduced
dramatically. However, this benefit has been offset by increased rates of driving (Dallmann
& Harley, 2010)).
International consensus has emerged that exposure to traffic-generated air pollution near
large roads increases risks for a number of adverse health effects, including asthma,
cardiovascular disease, adverse birth outcomes, cancer, and premature mortality (HEI Panel
on the Health Effects of Traffic-Related Air Pollution, 2010). Most air quality studies on this
subject have focused on roads with Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) counts of 100,000
or higher, but some health studies have found significant effects for populations near roads
with traffic volumes as low as 10,000 AADT, and certain portions of the population are more
susceptible to adverse health effects from exposures to air pollution, including children, the
98
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
elderly, outdoor athletes, and people with existing health conditions (ibid). In addition to
building ventilation and road treatments, some land use treatments may reduce near-road
air pollution concentrations, including vegetation buffers and physical separation of high
traffic roadways from pedestrian routes (Baldauf, et al., 2009).
Noise pollution
After controlling for the effects of near-road air pollution, there is still a correlation
between exposure to motor-vehicle traffic noise and the conditions of hypertension and
ischemic heart disease (Davies & Kamp, 2012). In a study in western Europe, the World
Health Organization concluded that noise pollution from transportation corridors resulted
in a substantial loss of disability adjusted life years (DALYs) (World Health Organization,
2011). However, these results were primarily attributed to the noise affecting people's
sleep and causing them annoyance, events that have yet to be linked by significant evidence
to any specific health condition (Hume, Brink, & Basner, 2012). Noise from major roadways
can also affect wildlife, particularly those who use sound for basic functions, such as birds
(Coffin, 2007).
Traffic accidents
In spite of significant reductions over the last twenty years, roadway accidents are still one
of the leading causes of death and injury in the United States. They are the number-four
cause of emergency-room visits for nonfatal injuries, one of the ten leading causes of death
for the general population, and the most common cause of death of all for people between
the ages of 5 and 24 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).
When a community is deciding whether or not to dedicate additional land to roadways, it is
prudent to consider the amount of risk of traffic-related injuries and deaths associated with
such roadways. However, the number of traffic injuries and fatalities that occur along a
jurisdiction's roadways may misrepresent the amount of risk to any given traveler, since it
does not account for how many people use the roadway or how much time they spend on it
Arriving at a standardized metric for the risk of being injured or killed in a traffic accident
represents a significant research gap. Although traffic-accident injuries and deaths among
motor-vehicle occupants are often reported on a per-vehicle-mile-traveled basis, there is
less consistency in how the risk of being in a traffic accident is reported for pedestrians and
cyclists.
Locations in which the total number of pedestrians and cyclists is higher tend to carry a
lower risk of any given pedestrian or cyclist being in a traffic accident, a phenomenon
referred to as safety-in-numbers (Jacobsen, 2003). Therefore, it has been suggested that
one "best practice" for reducing the risk of injuries and fatalities along roadways is to
institute policies and design features that encourage walking and cycling, based on the
theory that drivers who see a large number of pedestrians and cyclists using the same
transportation corridor will adopt more cautious driving habits than if pedestrians and
99
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
cyclists were only occasional users of the corridor. However, it is not guaranteed that this is
the causal link that produces the safety-in-numbers phenomenon (Bhatia & Wier, 2011).
For example, it could be that a particular transportation corridor is first made safer for
pedestrians and cyclists, such as through design changes, and that event motivates a
greater percentage of people to choose to walk or ride bicycles, in which case the greater
number of pedestrians and cyclists would not necessarily be the cause of any additional
improvement in safety. Furthermore, if people choose to walk or bicycle for trips that they
would otherwise have made by motor vehicle, overall vehicle traffic volume is reduced, an
event that is strongly associated with fewer traffic accidents.
Quantifying Economic Impacts of Roads
The easiest economic impacts to express quantitatively are the costs of building and
maintaining a roadway. Less easy to express in quantitative economic terms are
environmental impacts and societal outcomes, such as increased or decreased destination
accessibility and traveler safety (Shadewald, Hallmark, & Souleyrette, 2001). A common
indirect economic impact is the attraction of increased development activity to the parcels
of land that surround a major roadway, in response to either actual or anticipated increases
in accessibility or visibility (Hof, et al., 2012). On the other hand, certain types of
development can be discouraged in an area around a roadway on account of such
intermediate drivers as near-road air pollution and noise pollution (Hof, et al., 2012; Jha &
Kim, 2006). Indirect economic impacts, such as effects on the real-estate market, are often
difficult to plan for, as they may take many years to be fully realized (Polzin, 1999; Szeto,
Jaber, & O'Mahony, 2010). Furthermore, because indirect economic impacts are not
necessarily additive, the risk exists of indirect costs and benefits being double-counted (Hof,
et al., 2012).
Quantitative relations for roads
• Transportation-related surfaces appear to constitute about 60-70% of overall
imperviousness in metropolitan areas (City of Olympia 1995 and Goetz et al, 2004)..
• A 10% increase in roadway lane-miles is associated with a 5-10% increase in Vehicle
Miles Traveled (Sinha, 2003)
• 70% of the variability in private automobile ownership between different areas and
76% of the variability in automobile use between different areas can be explained
through correlations with the amount of road length per capita in each area (Sinha,
2003)
• Runoff from asphalt parking spaces had toxic concentrations of copper and zinc in
97% of samples, while less than 14% of samples infiltrated through permeable
concrete did (Brattebo & Booth, 2003).
• Runoff from asphalt parking spaces had detectable levels of motor oil in 89% of
samples, while no infiltrated water samples did (Brattebo & Booth, 2003).
100
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• For stream insect communities, at
least, the threshold of percent total
impervious area (PTIA) in the
watershed appears to be anywhere
between 5% and 25% (Morse, Huryn,
& Cronan, 2003). Above the threshold,
diversity drops precipitously.
Best Practices and unintended
consequences
Roads directly impact the landscape, and
reduce water quality and vegetation,
increase stormwater runoff, and fragment
habitats. Indirectly, they influence a host of
land use and planning issues including the
expansion of sprawl, water system efficiency,
travel behavior, air quality, and more. While
some of these impacts may be inescapable given
be mitigated through changes to transportation
planning, and land use.
Box 21. Integrated Urban Water
Management (IUWM) is an
approach that aims to helps
communities plan for sustainable
water infrastructure. The approach
emphasizes the use of decentralized
solutions such as rainwater tanks
and local wastewater recycling
(Burn, Maheeplala, and Sharma,
2012). This approach may be
particularly effective for sprawling
areas where centralized water
management systems are stretched
to the point of inefficiency.
the necessity for travel, many impacts can
practices, building design, regional
A compact development pattern has the potential to mitigate many of the direct impacts
from roads. Compact development minimizes the amount of roads necessary to serve a
given population (T. R. Schueler, 1994). This is turn minimizes the habitat destroyed and
fragmented, as well as impervious surface cover. A fundamental challenge to this has been
discussed by researchers. A necessary tradeoff exists between provisioning land for roads,
to aid mobility, and for non-road uses, particularly in the compact city center. The road
segments in the center of an urban area tend to be along a greater number of the routes
between travelers' origins and destinations than the road segments in other parts of the
urban area. Consequently, these areas are under the most pressure to expand road capacity,
and yet there is also a strong motive to dedicate more land in the center of an urban area to
non-road uses, necessitating a tradeoff (Medda, Nijkamp, & Rietveld, 2003). Balancing these
tradeoffs may require forecasting tools as well as a shift towards less road intensive forms
of transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and transit.
101
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
4 Relevant Metrics, Indicators, and Indices of
SUSTAINABILITY
4.1 Metrics of development form and pattern
Population and employment density are among the most commonly studied urban form
variables. However, researchers are finding that despite their associations with many
sustainability outcomes, they alone do not explain variations in many land use impacts (M.
Alberti, et al., 2007). Density measures must be taken together with urban form patterns,
which appear to have more direct impacts. For example, compactness refers to a
development pattern that is contained and contiguous. It requires a degree of density, but
refers to more than just that. Some of the literature on compactness refers to "The compact
city," and assigns to it many of the characteristics associated with holistic smart growth:
high densities, land use mix, fine grain of land uses, contained urban development,
multimodal transportation, high street connectivity, and more (Neuman, 2005). However
this formulation exists mainly as theory. In studies, compactness is typically measured
either through simple density or through a sprawl index.
4.1.1 Measuring sprawl and compactness
How to best define and measure sprawl, urban growth, and compactness is still under
debate (Kumar, et al., 2007; E. H. Wilson, et al., 2003; Zhang & Wang, 2006; G. Zhou & He,
2007). Development of a standardized, universally accepted definition of sprawl could
speed development of useful metrics for sprawl (E. H. Wilson, et al., 2003; Wolman et al.,
2005).There have been numerous attempts to define its meaning. Sprawl is broadly defined
as the use of land to create low density development that occurs in the transition zone from
rural to urban communities. More specifically, sprawl has been described (Russ Lopez &
Hynes, 2003) as containing one or more of the following elements;
• low-density development;
• separation of land uses;
• leapfrog development;
• strip retail development;
• automobile-dependent development;
• development at the periphery of an urban area at the expense of its core;
• employment decentralization;
• loss of peri-urban, rural agriculture, and open space;
• fragmented governmental responsibility and oversight
102
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
This suggests that the processes creating sprawl are varied and that there can be many
varieties of sprawl. Ewing et al. (2003) identified sprawl as the process in which the spread
of development across the landscape far outpaces population growth. They recognized that
the landscape sprawl creates has four dimensions: a population that is widely dispersed in
low density development; rigidly separated homes, shops, and workplaces; a network of
roads marked by huge blocks and poor access; and a lack of well-defined, thriving activity
centers, such as downtowns and town centers. They are able to generate a Sprawl Index
which can quantify the degree of Sprawl for any given area using data for 22 specific
measures within these 4 dimensions. Most of
the other features usually associated with
sprawl—the lack of transportation choices,
relative uniformity of housing options or the
difficulty of walking—are a result of these
conditions.
One measureable consequence of sprawl is
the expansion of land consumed per capita.
Yet sprawl is more than a lack of density
(Joshu, et al., 2008). Urban sprawl is also a
function of how density is distributed across
a metropolitan area. Instead of a single
definition, some promote four common
dimensions of the landscape that sprawl
creates: "a population that is widely
dispersed in low density development; rigidly
separated homes, shops, and workplaces; a
network of roads marked by huge blocks and
poor access; and a lack of well-defined,
thriving activity centers, such as downtowns
and town centers (R. Ewing, R. Pendall, et al.,
2003)." Given the difficulty in defining and
measuring sprawl, others reject the
dichotomy between urban and sprawling
land use. Instead they promote the idea of four distinct land use patterns:
1. "deconcentrated, dense areas: intensively and continuously developed but without
major clusters;
2. "leapfrog areas: highly concentrated pockets amid generally low density,
discontinuous development;
3. "compact, core-dominant areas: development with high proximity to the central
nucleus, but only moderate density and continuity;
Box 22. EPA Product Highlight
Common sustainability metrics
and indicators are catalogued in a
report that ranks the 50 most
populous cities in US based upon
these metrics (SHC Task 2.2.1.1).
They conclude that the inclusion or
exclusion of sustainability metrics
has a large impact on the rank
ordering of cities, over and above
the health and environmental
rankings alone.
This product may be a useful
resource not only for researchers
and sustainability index
developers, but also for
community decision makers to
make the case that tracking
sustainability will improve local
outcomes.
103
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
4. "dispersed areas: development extending far from the core without notable
concentrations or nuclei (Cutsinger & Galster, 2006)."
Methods to measure sprawl typically include satellite land cover data to classify land into
various degrees of urbanization, and 2) growth patterns, including infill, expansion, isolated,
linear branch, and clustered branch (E. H. Wilson, et al., 2003). Modifications, including the
addition of road density and additional sprawl indicators, have been used to improve this
approach (R. Ewing, R. Pendall, et al., 2003; Kumar, et al., 2007). Recently, urban ecologists
have emphasized the need to incorporate a temporal perspective in measuring the degree
of urbanization, particularly in modern sprawling cities where developed areas often have a
history of agricultural use and varying degrees of remnant vegetation over time (Ramalho &
Hobbs, 2012). This history of disturbance informs the current vegetation condition, species
condition, a biodiversity response (ibid).
4.1.2 Metrics of urban form
As discussed above, recent literature has been moving away from using neighborhood scale
density as a metric of good urban development, towards more form-based measures such
as street connectivity and mixed-uses. That is for very good reason. Density is a very
imprecise way to approximate urban form at neighborhood level. Not only does it not
capture important variations in urban form such as a mix of uses, street intersection density,
sidewalks, setbacks, and more, but it also is easily distorted. For example, lower densities in
city centers can arise from abandonment and high vacancy.
How land use characteristics are measured significantly impacts the results of studies, which
can confuse the effort to determine the impact of land use characteristics on human well
being. This is particularly evident in the measurement of mixed-uses. First of all, the
geographic scale is important. Some studies analyze a mix of uses based political boundaries,
such as the census tract. This method obscures variations in size, and may attribute a high
land use mix to a distance that couldn't be covered by a walker. More reliable studies
perform an analysis at a smaller scale.
Second, the particular mix of land uses included affects the outcome (H. E. Christian, et al.,
2011). The land uses most relevant to walking appear to be residential, commercial, and
institutional. Including industrial, agricultural, or parkland in the measure may give a high
measure of mixed-use to an area that is of little interest to potential walkers.
Third, for many outcomes of interest, it is important what form the mix of uses take. For
example, one study in Atlanta has found more mixed uses to be associated with a lower
sense of community (Wood, et al., 2010). The authors note that this negative association
existed when an area had a mix of uses without other elements of walkable design - i.e.
there was a mix of residential uses and big box retailers with large setbacks. Therefore, it is
important for planners to not focus on a mix of uses alone, but incorporate a variety of
elements needed for thriving communities. Nonetheless, comparing neighborhoods with a
104
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
bundle of traits such as mixed-use, walkable, and compact compared to dispersed, car
dependent, and single-use, can make it difficult to determine the magnitude of the effects
of a single characteristic.
Evaluations of land uses and impacts vary in their specificity and have become more
sophisticated as the research area matures. The most basic analyses focus on only a single
factor, like density or diversity of land use. Regression analysis of multiple factors has the
benefit of determining the relative magnitude of each factor. Finally, arguably the most
valuable method analyses multiple factors as well as demographic variables, which can
distinguish how much of an effect is due to self selection, e.g. people who already like
walking choosing to live in a walkable neighborhood (T. Litman & Steele, 2012). In addition,
more precise metrics have moved from coarse (census tract or larger) proxies, to finer grain
measurements that capture neighborhood variations, such as number of street
intersections and mix of walkable uses. Composite measures have been found to be more
consistent predictors both for mixed-uses and walkability (Vargo, Stone, & Glanz, 2012;
Wood, et al., 2010). Furthermore, precise measures may no longer necessarily depend on
local or hand collected data. Vargo et al (2012) have recently had good success predicting
walking outcomes with composite measures using publicly available data from Google,
including the existence and connectivity of sidewalks.
Some of the metrics of development patterns commonly used in sustainability literature
include:
• Density. In the urban form literature, this is typically measured by either people per
acre or, for residential neighborhoods, dwelling units per acre. For regional studies,
it is typically measured at the city, metropolitan, or county level. Particularly in
transportation studies, the metropolitan area may be broken down to the CBD
(central business district) and the outer area. As mentioned above, it is an imprecise
proxy for form, particularly at the neighborhood level.
• Transit accessibility. The amount of access that people have to public transit may be
measured (inversely) by the average distance that one must travel from a given
dwelling unit or employment location in order to reach the nearest transit stop.
Other measures that are easier to calculate include the density of transit stops in an
area, the density of transit routes, and the average distance in between transit stops
(R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010a). The measure does not often incorporate the
robustness of the transit system, and therefore is limited in its ability to indicate the
willingness of travelers to use transit.
• Street intersection density and the related measure of street connectivity
distinguish between land uses along the continuum of winding road networks with
many dead ends and dense grids with short blocks. High intersection density
105
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
shortens distances between destinations and provides more route options for
drivers and transit networks. Both of these things can help to reduce traffic
bottlenecks, improve the transit network, and make alternative transportation
modes more viable. This is the land use measure most strongly associated with an
increase in walking and bicycling for transportation, and it also is one of the stronger
land use drivers of VMT (R. Ewing & Cervero, 2010a).
• Sprawl indices. The most widely used is one published in 2003 which relies on
combining many variables to represent density, land use mix, degree of centering,
and street accessibility (R. Ewing, R. Pendall, et al., 2003). These are discussed in
more detail above.
• 3D + R is a commonly used measurement method for walkability. Lee and Moudon
(2006) have proposed a simpler alternative to measuring land use mix and street
connectivity to predict walking behavior. Walking is more sensitive to detailed
environmental characteristics compared to driving, thus, parcel-level data in GIS may
offer economic and valid ways to quantify the built environment. Using parcel-level
data, Lee and Moudon (2006) developed a process to identify variables and
measures that are associated with walking. Variables strongly correlated with
walking were grouped as destinations, distance, density, and route: the 3Ds + R.
Distance measures to a variety routine daily destinations, supplemented with
density measures and the directness of the walking route, are shown to be simple
and effective alternatives to complicated composite measures often used to capture
land use mix and street connectivity. This method can serve as the core constructs
to quantify neighborhood walkability for policies aimed at promoting walkable
communities. The authors also found that distance along a route to a variety of
destinations better captures street connectivity than measures such as intersection
density or block size.
4.2 Indices of Sustainable Development
Communities need way to track their progress towards the elusive goal of sustainability. It is
increasingly recognized that community well being depends on the provision of ecosystem
services, social vitality, equality of opportunity, political participation, and other attributes
not captured in traditional metrics and rankings such as unemployment and property values.
Several organizations have stepped up to provide credible indices of sustainability to aid
communities to take stock of the current status, set goals for the future, and measure
progress towards community objectives. They exist for a continuum of scales from the
neighborhood level up to the national.
• Neighborhood Vitality Index (NVI): Several localities have developed customized
neighborhood vitality indices to suit their local needs. These indices are designed to
106
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
be used at the neighborhood level to identify disparities in health between different
neighborhoods in the area. An effort by the Action for Neighborhood Change (ANC)
in Toronto has published a report about their index which includes details and
rationale for all metrics included:
http://www.unitedwaytoronto.com/downloads/whatWeDo/reports/ANC_neighbou
rhoodVitalitylndex.pdf
• Cumulative environmental hazard inequality index (CEHII) summarizes
socioeconomic inequalities in exposure to environmental hazards including
particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, diesel particulate matter, and estimates of
cancer risk. Importantly, it identifies areas with high cumulative risk from all the
factors included.
• STAR Community Index is a national sustainability rating system and framework
developed by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).
The index provides a comprehensive set of performance measures by which to track
and compare progress towards economic, social, and environmental goals.
http://www.starcommunities.org/
• National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership (NNIP): This partnership runs the
NNIP Shared Indicators System which aims to assemble national and local data on
shared indicators of human well-being for the country, allowing location
comparisons. They plan to update and share the data on an ongoing basis.
http://www.neighborhoodindicators.org/activities/projects/nnip-shared-indicators-
system
• The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) is an economic indicator promoted as a more
accurate measure of total economic welfare than the GDP. It adjusts personal
consumption with measures of income distribution, environmental costs, crime,
pollution and more, and adds non-market activities such as volunteering and
household work (Kubiszewski et al., 2013).
• Ecological footprint is a measure of humanity's demand on nature by determining
how much biologically productive land is necessary to provide humans with the
goods and services to sustain society. This measure helps highlight our current
overconsumption of land and the increasing need to plan for sustainable land use.
Biocapacity is a related measure of the productive land available, given current
technology. Research has shown that biocapacity per capita has been declining since
data has been available in the 1960s (Kubiszewski, et al., 2013).
107
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• The Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) combines 32 variables to provide an indicator
of the social vulnerability to environmental hazards on a county scale for the entire
U.S.. The index synthesizes variables that have been identified in the research
literature to be correlated with increased difficulty of a community to prepare for,
respond to, and recover from disaster (Emrich & Cutter, 2011; Hazards and
Vulnerability Institute, 2012).
• Wisconsin County Health Rankings. While community health assessments are often
performed by county health departments, they are not often widely publicized. The
University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute has published county level
health rankings each year since 2003 to elicit public discussion and action. An
assessment of this strategy concluded that the strategy had resulted in good media
coverage across the state, and that local public health officials used the ranking for a
variety of purposes, including identifying program targets (Rohan, Booske, &
Remington, 2013).
• An indicator of obesogenic environments for youth has been developed, which
incorporates GIS-based measures of walkability, access to parks, quality of parks,
density of fast-food restaurants, and distance to supermarkets. The indicator is
meant to expand beyond simply walkability to capture both "payability" and access
to healthy food (L. D. Frank et al., 2012; Saelens, Sallis, et al., 2012).
• A HUD, USDA, DOT, and EPA document on rural communities outlines
performance measures for success promoting rural prosperity, including several for
agriculture (Partnership for Sustainable, United States. Dept. of, United States. Dept.
of Housing and Urban, United States. Dept. of, & United States. Environmental
Protection, 2011):
o rate of agricultural land lost to development
o percentage of prime agricultural land placed under permanent conservation
easement
• Indexes of Biotic Integrity (IBI) are multimetric indexes that have been developed
and tailored to specific ecoregions and waterways. These indexes are constructed to
evaluate overall ecosystem health, or more specifically the impact of anthropogenic
influences on ecosystem health, using simple algorithms based on relatively easily
measured physical and chemical attributes of surface water systems expected in
specific ecoregions or areas with similar background characteristics. These tools
have utility in assessing cumulative environmental impacts to surface waters that
can then be useful in assessing performance of a strategy for achieving sustainable
resource management of these systems. In addition, IBI can be used to identify the
108
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
threshold proportions of riparian zones to developed land use that must be
maintained within a watershed to sustain biotic integrity (Steedman, 1988; Yoder &
Rankin, 1996).
• An Index of Urban Environmental Quality (UEQ) has been published that uses
landsat imagery and U.S. Census data to measure and rate four factors: greenness,
crowdedness, economic status, and scenic amenity. Though communities may have
different prioritization for the most important factors of urban quality, the method
illustrates an effective way to combine satellite images and census data into a
composite index that planners can use to track progress in the urban environment
(Liang & Weng, 2011).
• Green area ratio (GAR) is a site level metric of green surface cover of a parcel. It has
been proposed for inclusion into the Washington D.C. zoning code, which will
mandate a minimum proportion of green cover to impervious surface cover on a
parcel (Keeley, 2011). It is intended to improve stormwater treatment, alleviate the
heat island effect, and improve air quality and aesthetics. Critics note that such a
requirement may create a perverse incentive for low density development on large
lots, and penalize high density developments that use space efficiently.
5 Land Use Patterns Show Causal Relations to
Economic, Health, and Environmental Impacts
5.1 What neighborhood scale land use qualities are most important for
ADVANCING SUSTAINABILITY?
Prime land for human settlement and agriculture is dwindling. . Over the past 25 years, land
consumption per person has increased from 0.29 acres in 1982 to 0.36 acres per person in
2007 (ERS, 2009; U.S Census Bureau, 2012). The optimization of land use is becoming
increasingly important to meet the diverse and sometimes competing needs of society for
housing, food, fiber, clean air and water. If anything stands out from this synthesis, it is that
compact, verdant development advances many of the important outcomes identified. To
achieve this form, regional and multidisciplinary coordination is essential. Urban form at the
neighborhood and regional level is inextricably tied to transportation investments. The
layout and composition of the transportation network drives whether an area becomes
compact or dispersed, multimodal or automobile dependent, mixed-use or single-use, and
whether an area promotes or limits accessibility.
The top few elements of the land use, design, and transportation that were identified in the
literature to have the strongest impact on a number of important outcomes have been
109
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
summarized in the figure below. However neighborhood and regional needs vary widely,
and it should be kept in mind that the elements identified below can be achieved in a
diversity of ways, that match the context of the place, whether it be a rural village, coastal
town, or metropolis. Decisions on land use and transportation investments may be driven
by developers' cost considerations, local and regional government investments, and zoning
requirements. As research on the built environment matures, the associations here should
be teased out to describe the fundamental characteristics of human settlements that
support sustainable living.
Table 2 Neighborhood land use qualities and positively associated outcomes
Outcomes
Land use qualities
Reference
transit stops
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
Walking for
intersection density
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
transportation
housing age
(Brown, 2009)
mixed-use
(Duncan et al, 2010)
Walking for leisure
perception of safety
pleasant aesthetics
(Frank et al, 2008; Doyle et al, 2006)
(Frost et al., 2010)
Park use
park quality
(Tucker et al, 2008; Kaczynski et al, 2008)
park amenities
(Tucker et al, 2008; Kaczynski et al, 2008)
walkability
(Brown, 2009; Doyle et al, 2007; King et al,
Lower Obesity/BMI
transit-oriented development
2011)
(TOD)
(Brown, 2009)
Lower Driving/VMT
intersection density
job accessibility by auto
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
intersection density
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
Transit use
distance to transit stop
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
TOD
(Mumford et al, 2011)
low sprawl index
(Ewing, Schieber and Zegeer, 2003; Frumkin,
Traffic safety
more walkers and bicyclists
2002)
(Jacobsen 2003)
Lower crime
greening/infill vacant parcels
(Branas, 2009)
mixed-use and walkable
(Leyden, 2003)
Social Capital
density ~40 units/acre
(Bramley et al, 2009)
housing age diversity
(King, 2013)
Mental well-being
exposure to greenspace
(Day, 2008; Kaplan, 2001; Bowler, 2010; Kuo,
2001)
Diversity
mix of housing types
(Talen, 2008)(Lovejoy, Flandy, and
Mokhtarian, 2010)
Lower health
green neighborhoods
(Mitchell and Popham, 2008)
disparity
compact development
(Strategic Economics, 2013 and Smart Growth
Low capital or
service cost
green infrastructure/low
impact development
America, 2013)
(Environmental Protection Agency, 2007);
open space
(Odefey et al., 2012)
(Fausold and Lilieholm, 1999)
110
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
Fewer extreme heat
events
compact development pattern
(Stone et al, 2010)
Cooler air
temperatures
parks and tree cover
(Environmental Protection Agency, 2008); (Yu
and Hien, 2006)
Property values
walkability
TOD
adjacent large parks
(too contingent)
(Pivo and Fisher, 2011)
(Poizing, 1999)
(Larson and Parrings, 2013; Fausold and
Lilieholm, 1999)
Retail revenue
walkability
trees
(Leinberger and Alfonzo 2012)
(Wolf, 2003)
Air pollution
(immediate vicinity)
density
traffic congestion
accessibility by auto
urban areas
(Melia, 2011)
(Sarszynski et al, 2006)
(Zhou and Levy 2007; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency 2013)
(Alberti, 2007)
5.1.1 Active transportation, physical activity, health, and social well-being
For encouraging alternative transportation, physical activity, and the attendant health
benefits such as cardiovascular fitness and reduced risk for obesity, a bundle of
neighborhood characteristics is most effective. These characteristics are a dense street grid
(with few dead ends and cul-de-sacs) to minimize travel distance, a mix of everyday uses
within walking distance from homes and workplaces, moderate to high average density,
access to parks and green elements such as street trees, and design characteristics that
facilitate Walkability.
While a dense street grid is one of the most important land use characteristics for the
encouragement of walking for transportation, it is unrelated or even mildly detrimental to
the encouragement of walking for leisure (Oakes et al, 2007).
In rural areas, physical activity is most associated with pleasant aesthetics, trails, safety,
parks, and walkable destinations (Frost, et al., 2010). This complicates the quest for the
ideal land use conditions to encourage overall physical activity. The perception of safety is
critically important for community walkability . Though safety and perception of safety can
be influenced by land use choices such as a mix of uses that provide around the clock
activity, street trees, and infill or greening to eliminate vacant lots (Branas, et al., 2011).
For supporting mental health and social capital, an overlapping, but different set of
characteristics have the largest positive impact. These include high exposure to greenspaces,
moderately high density around 40 units per acre, a mix of uses and housing types, and
walkability as measured through qualitative audits.
Compact, walkable neighborhoods are not only beneficial environmentally and socially, but
they are also desired by consumers. Support for mixed-use traditionally designed
communities has grown from 44% in 2003 to 59% in 2005, though support is lower in rural
111
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
communities and among those who expect such communities to have space limitations
(Handy, Sallis, Weber, Maibach, & Hollander, 2008). The National Association of Home
Builders (2001) identifies a trend towards mixed-use communities with neotraditional
design and predicts that future neighborhood will have smaller lots, narrower streets, and
less paved area. Furthermore, there is more demand for walkable and transit accessible
neighborhoods than is currently being met (Carnoske, 2010). Specifically, TOD often
appears to have higher economic returns than other forms of development, even those
considered smart growth. Large parks also increase values for adjacent properties, and
residential neighborhoods are particularly affected (Fausold & Lilieholm, 1999; Larson,
2013).
Box 23. SHC Product Highlight:
DASEES (Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Environment, Economy, and
Society), in SHC Task 1.1.1.2, is a stakeholder collaboration tool that guides users
through a decision analysis framework to help participants build common
understanding of complex problems and identify solutions. This tool helps
communities collaboratively answer the questions "Which values are important
to my community and what decisions help to reach those values?" It is intended
to be adaptable to address specific sustainability issues that arise from the
Theme 4 decision sectors. It is adaptable both in regards to the problems it
analyzes and the scale of the issue, which are user defined. A prototype of the
tool usable by experienced modelers will be available in September 2013,
however, a user-friendly version that includes a menu of common decisions
communities make should be available online near the end of 2014.
5.1.2 Climate change and extreme heat events
To mitigate and adapt to climate change through neighborhood scale interventions,
promising techniques are green infrastructure, including street trees, urban forestry, and
parks to sequester carbon, as well as transit oriented development, to encourage residents
to reduce automobile transport. These same interventions impact air quality in other ways,
which can affect human health. Green infrastructure helps scrub the air of pollutants that
can aggravate asthma and upper respiratory disease (Cavanagh, et al., 2009; Francisco J.
Escobedo, et al., 2008). In addition, evidence has quantified the ability of green roofs, street
trees, and more to cool air temperatures, potentially mitigating the urban heat island effect
(Environmental Protection Agency: Office of Atmospheric & Environmental Protection
Agency: Climate Protection Partnership, 2008; Yu & Hien, 2006).
112
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
On the other hand, TODs typically have higher levels of air pollution on site, though
emissions per capita are greatly reduced (Haas, 2010). This is likely true of many compact
neighborhoods. An important research need going forward is to understand the magnitude
of the tradeoff between elevated local emissions and reduced regional emissions, and to
what degree that can be mitigated through green infrastructure. Particularly for coastal
communities experiencing sea level rise, climate adaptation may be a more pressing land
use need than mitigation. Here again, green infrastructure offers some options. A direct
approach may involve converting developed areas closest to the coast to low intensity uses
such as parks and boardwalks.
More proactive measures to hold the line, rather than retreat, include maintaining
protective dunes, reefs, and wetland areas (Arkema et al., 2013; Barbier, et al., 2013). A
recent analysis showed that maintaining existing reefs and coastal vegetation fully intact
could halve the number of people, vulnerable populations, and property exposed to coastal
hazard by the year 2100 (Arkema et al., 2013).
5.1.3 Environmental Justice and Neighborhood Urban Form
Finally, the literature provides substantial evidence for links between urban forms and
environmental justice issues. First, socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods are
disproportionately located in areas with higher health burdens and lower access to services.
Low socioeconomic status (SES) communities on average have lower access to
supermarkets and higher access to fast food outlets, which is linked to obesity (R. P. Lopez,
2007) (L. Frank et al., 2009). Disparities between socio-economic groups exist with regard to
access to, and usability of, parks and green space. They have less urban vegetation and
lower park space per capita (Boone et al, 2009 and Sister et al, 2010), exposing those
communities to greater risk of Urban Heat Island effects (Jenerette, Harlan, Stefanov, &
Martin, 2011). Low SES neighborhoods also tend to score lower on measures of walkability
(Sallis et al., 2011), are more often located near to industrial land uses (Abel & White, 2011;
Maantay, 2001), and are more often located near to highways (R. Lopez, 2006), leading to
community disruption, lower walkability, and higher air pollution exposure. Considering
public safety, design elements, and amenities can improve the access to and usability of
parks and green space for a broader demographic spectrum.
113
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Second, certain community design and urban form patterns impose a disproportionate
burden on vulnerable groups, no matter where they live. For example, a sprawling urban
form that separates residences and destinations, a lack of transit, and broken sidewalks all
impair the mobility of those who are unable to drive, whether due to age or a physical
handicap (Kochtitzky, et al., 2011). Youth are the most underrepresented demographic
group in walkable neighborhoods, perhaps more so than low-income and minorities (Cutts,
et al., 2009). More research is needed to reveal
how demographics and other community
attributes mediate impacts of urban form. For
example, though it is well established that
when holding all else equal good pedestrian
design leads to more physical activity and
lower obesity, other community factors have a
larger impact that can negate this effect. The
perception of a lack of safety has been shown
to dampen the benefits of a walkable
neighborhood (L. D. Frank, et al., 2008).
It is important to keep in mind that the
relationship between environment and equity
is not one-way. Equity impacts environmental
choices and environmental quality as well.
Research has shown that countries with more
equal income distribution, great political rights,
and higher literacy tend to have clean air and
water (Torras & Boyce, 1998; Wilkinson,
Pickett, & Vogli, 2010). Wilkinson et al (2010)
cite three primary supported reasons why
equality is actually a precondition for
sustainability: 1) inequality makes people more
materialistic and less likely to have positive
attitudes towards the environment, 2) more
equal societies engender more feelings of
collective responsibility, and 3) more equal
societies are more innovative, as measured by
patents per capita.
Box 24. The Community-Focused
Exposure and Risk Screening
Tool (C-FERST) and Tribal-FERST
are being developed in SHC Task
2.2.1.5. These web-based
decision support tools are
designed to help identify and
prioritize local environmental
issues. They are still in
development however they have
great relevance to land use.
The tools allow users to: follow
walk-through guidance and
strategies for conducting
community and tribal
assessments; identify relevant
local environmental issues;
download information on these
issues; map 5 exposures and
risks; prioritize their community's
issues; explore potential
solutions; and link to other
community-relevant tools
including EPA/ORD's National
Atlas. T-FERST and C-FERST are
emerging tools that will help
decision makers identify
environmental health issues in
their communities, identify
priorities in the context of limited
resources and competing
interests and address them
effectively.
114
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
5.2 What regional land use qualities are most important for advancing
SUSTAINABILITY?
5.2.1 Regional coordination to avoid unintended consequences
The pattern and form of regional development contributes to achieving sustainable
communities. In the United States, urban land is projected to increase from 3.1 % in 2000 to
8.1 % in 2050 under a business as usual scenario (D. J. Nowak & Walton, 2005), which will
consume fertile farmland, essential forests, and other land that provides necessary
ecosystem services. Regional planning, growth controls, and incentives can contribute to
containing this expansion, building up rather than out, while improving livability at the same
time.
Though the exact thresholds and ranges necessary to qualify urban and regional form as
sustainable are not yet clearly defined, it is clear it involves a balance. Achieving
sustainability means balancing compaction and congestion, liveliness and intensity,
greenfield preservation and access to parks and greenspace. For example, compact cities
decrease emissions on a regional scale, however higher population and without strong
transit systems, experience higher congestion, and higher emissions within the city.. One
European study indicates that moderate density cities may have the lowest energy usage,
however this may be due, in part, to differences in disposable incomes, as the study
incorporated air travel. This type of comprehensive comparative energy use study has yet to
be done in the United States.
It is important that this development is coordinated on a regional scale to take into
consideration both the urban area, rural area, and any neighboring towns and cities.
Planning in this way may help to prevent spillover effects. For example, over-restricted
growth or over-restricted land use types may be displaced to adjacent jurisdictions without
regional cooperation. Within the same jurisdiction, a regional perspective can ensure
informed siting for new developments
The top few elements of the land use, design, and transportation that were identified in the
literature to have the strongest impact on a number of important outcomes have been
summarized in the figure below.
Table 3 Regional land use qualities and positively associated outcomes
Outcomes
Land use qualities
Less
Driving/VMT
centralization
density
job accessibility by auto
mix of all is cumulative
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
(Litman, 2012; Su 2011; Ewing and
Cervero, 2010; Cao, Mokhtarian, and
Handy, 2006)
Transit use
fewer parking spaces
(Sinha, 2003)
115
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
intersection density
(Ewing and Cervero, 2010b)
Traffic safety
low sprawl index
(Ewing, Schieber and Zegeer, 2003;
Frumkin, 2002)
Social Capital
shorter commute time
accessibility
(Besser et al, 2008)
(Flolt-Lunstad, Smith, and Layton 2010;
Besser, Marcus, and Frumkin 2008;
Christian 2012a, 2012b; Fujiwara and
Kawachi 2008; Dickens et al. 2011)
Emotional
well-being
shorter commute time
(Miles et al, 2011)
Productivity
efficient transit
density
(Nelson and Peterman, 2000)
(Cervero, 2001)
Low
infrastructure
cost
density
(Burchell et al, 2000); (Choi and Fricke,
2010); (AKRF Inc, 2011); (Deal and
Schunk, 2004); (Chang et al, 1999); (Muro
and Puentes, 2004)
Clean air (in
region)
compact development pattern
(VandeWeghe and Kennedy, 2007 and
Alberti, 2007)
Low residential
energy use
moderate density (24-32
units/acre)
(Holden and Norland, 2005)
Land
conservation
compact development pattern
(United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 2001), (McLaren, 1992)
Construction
jobs
growth management policies
(Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2002,
PriceWaterhouseCoopers and Lend Lease
Real Estate Investments,
LLP, 2002.)
Personal
income
growth controls
(Florida, 2000)
Traffic
congestion
density
compact development pattern
(Sarszynski et al, 2006)
(Sarzynski et al, 2006), (Melia, Parkhurst
and Barton, 2011)
GHG emissions
per capita
low density
prosperity
(VandeWeghe and Kennedy, 2007 and
Alberti, 2007)
(Hienonen et al, 2011)
Extreme heat
events
sprawl
(Stone et al, 2010)
5.2.2 Compact Development Pattern
Perhaps the largest issue surrounding land use and development is sprawl. As people move
away from inner cities and out towards less developed land, urban abandonment is being
found in more and more large cities. Economic disinvestment is a major concern for these
inner city areas. Outside of cities, in suburban or rural areas, land use becomes a major
issue when natural land is converted to built environments. In addition to disruption of
ecological functions and land contiguity, sprawl can lead to increasing stressors on natural
116
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
resources. For example, increasing
demand for development leads to much
higher water usage, and concern for
contamination and infiltration of runoff
into local rivers and streams magnifies.
Land use and transportation decisions
affect and constrain each other. Building
a compact mix of uses lessens the need
for long trips, and can potentially lower
congestion and decrease the demand for
new roads. Conversely, new highway
construction divides neighborhoods
physically and psychologically, and
speeds the expansion of development to
new areas. Though any individual land
use element appears to have a small
effect on transportation mode choice and
VMT, they are cumulative and reinforcing.
Smart growth plans which integrate
multiple land use changes have been
shown to reduce vehicle ownership and
travel by 20-40% (T. Litman & Steele,
2012). Overall land use pattern matters;
the perfect new urbanist development
built in a remote location will still
generate more VMT than a single use
neighborhood in the urban core.
Research shows that the most impactful
variable on travel behavior is destination
accessibility. Land use elements such as
compactness, centeredness, design
features, and mixed uses all affect how accessible destinations are, and which
transportation modes will be most efficient. To affect travel behavior through land use
policies, it is necessary to think in terms of how the policies affect destination accessibility,
which is strongly correlated with less driving and more walking, cycling, and transit-riding.
Destination accessibility is a product of development density, land use diversity, and both
the design and operation of the entire transportation system. Destination accessibility is
typically defined by whether individual travelers have a large proportion of different types
of destinations reachable within a reasonable timeframe and at a reasonable monetary cost.
Although residents of a dense, mixed-use, walkable, safe, pleasant neighborhood are likely
Box 25. Green Communities Program
The EPA's Green Communities
Program provides communities with
access to a wide array of planning
tools and information relevant to
sustainability issues. The
presentation of the tools and
information is organized around a
five-step collaborative planning
process, which the tools and
information are meant to help
communities implement:
Step 1, Community Assessment. Look
holistically at the present state of the
community.
Step 2, Trends Analysis: Determine
what the future state of the
community will be in a "do-nothing"
scenario.
Step 3, Visioning Process: Decide
what future state (or states) it is
desirable for the community to
achieve and can be arrived at through
appropriate actions.
Step 4, Sustainable Action Plans:
117
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
to have lower rates of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) than residents of other neighborhoods,
the neighborhoods with the lowest VMT per capita are ones located in the cores of urban
areas, where residents of a given neighborhood have high rates of accessibility both to
destinations within their own neighborhood and to those in a large number of other
neighborhoods. Destination accessibility is also an important driver of economic activity
and differences in accessibility between neighborhoods can exacerbate socioeconomic
disparities.
Reducing VMT does not only contribute to environmental goals, such as lowering overall air
pollution levels, but also to livability. Reducing commute time reduces frustration and
increases leisure time. And congestion has impacts on the people living near it. Holding
density constant, living in an area with more auto commuters is associated with more
depressive symptoms.
Parking availability is less studied, however also influences people's decisions about
whether to drive, walk, or take transit. In addition, a plentiful supply of parking decreases
demand for public transit. Zoning codes typically provide minimum parking requirements
based upon peak usage, and no maximums. In some cities, off street parking spaces alone
are estimated to take up over 20% of urban land (Mid-America Regional Council, 2010).
Offering more efficient parking options and increasing transit use has the potential to more
effectively use land, through infill projects, for parks, and to reduce usage of greenspace. In
addition, minimizing the space used by parking lots may also encourage walking and biking,
by reducing travel distances between destinations.
The impact of urban form on transportation has implications for energy use and climate. On
a per capita basis, holding income constant, GHG emissions are significantly lower in denser,
more compact cities (M. Alberti, et al., 2007; VandeWeghe & Kennedy, 2007). Because
climate change is a global issue, contributions to climate change also need to be evaluated
from a holistic perspective that incorporates both production and consumption. When
household air travel is included, prosperous dense cities begin to have higher energy
consumption and climate footprints. Some hypothesize, with some supporting data, that
this effect may not entirely be due to prosperity, but that a lack of private greenspace in the
densest cities may motivate people to fly to the countryside for vacations (Holden &
Norland, 2005). For this reason, they found, at least in the context of Norway, that medium
density cities (between 24 and 32 dwellings per acre) are the most energy efficient.
Regional planning for environmental sustainability often addresses balancing intensity and
density of use with compaction that preserves greenfields. Denser areas have been
correlated with increased deforestation and invasive species, however this may be a result
of the densest areas also being the highest in overall population. More compact cities of
similar population levels actually have more biodiversity within the region; probably
because more open space is preserved to provide habitat.
118
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Compact cities also appear to experience fewer extreme heat events. This is also assumed
to be due to regional cooling effects provided by the lower impervious surfaces overall. To
understand this effect, impervious surfaces must be measured on a per capita basis, rather
than a per unit area basis. Measured on a per unit basis, more compact regions typically
have higher impervious surface levels than areas with many personal lawns. However when
measured on a per capita basis, compact towns and cities accommodate more people with
lower impervious surfaces. However research explicitly comparing the impervious surface
loads of compact versus dispersed regions is lacking.
5.2.3 Accessibility and Affordability
Most social and human well being effects are seen at a smaller neighborhood scale, and
understandably so. Compactness at a regional level isn't clearly associated with BMI and
only weakly with walking. However, research does support a few conclusions. Those with
shorter commute times enjoy higher levels of social capital, more frequent social trips, and
fewer depressive symptoms. Unfortunately, though compact cities lessen driving distances,
they do not always lead to shorter commute times due to congestion.
Transportation and land use decisions have impacts beyond those on energy use and travel
behavior. Urban patterns that widen the distance between homes, jobs, and other
destinations cause many households to spend more time and money on transportation. For
some, this pattern imposes a disproportionate burden. For the physically handicapped,
elderly, or youth who can't drive, long distances between destinations and a lack of public
transit may constitute an insurmountable barrier to mobility. Handicapped accessibility
used to be an issue focused solely on building and site specific features. However it is
increasingly clear that accessibility is an important issue at the neighborhood and regional
scales as well. Dannenberg et al, (2003) cites the need for research to evaluate the health
and social well-being impacts of transportation policies and single-use residential patterns
on persons with disabilities. Density, when it increases the proportion of high-density
housing such as apartment and row houses, may lessen socioeconomic disparities in
another way as well, through reducing residential income segregation and improving access
to transit and public services.
On the other hand, housing in denser areas frequently costs more per square foot. This can
be offset by lower transportation costs, but whether these savings outweigh the costs can
depend on many factors. The Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, supported by
the Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT), attempts to calculate this for users. The
tool allows users to search a nationwide map for their metropolitan area, and compare
housing affordability to affordability with transportation cost estimates included. The index
illustrates that in many areas, including transportation costs in affordability estimates often
can highlight more central locations as more affordable.
119
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
5.2.4 Minimizing costs and maximizing vitality
Research on the economic impacts of the regional development pattern fall the categories:
infrastructure costs, the impacts of growth controls, and the business benefits of various
development forms.
Denser development generally incurs lower infrastructure costs, and certainly has a lower
infrastructure cost to tax revenue ratio on a per acre basis. Respected economist and
Federal Reserve Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of Rhode Island, Edward Gramlich
(2002) has stated that "the application of smart growth strategies over the next twenty-five
years could save as much as $250 billion, mainly in the form of infrastructure investment."
On the other hand, density may not have an association with public costs overall, though
research that is able to measure density at a neighborhood scale is necessary to refine this
finding.
The presence of growth management measures is positively associated with overall
personal income levels in a metropolitan area (Florida, 2000). Whether this is because areas
with growth control measures improve wages, or attract higher income residents, or if
regions with higher incomes are more likely to implement growth controls is not clear.
However it does seem clear that as long as they are accompanied by appropriate
modifications to policy and regulation, growth controls do not threaten housing
affordability.
Cities may be able to improve their productivity and market demand through regional land
use actions. First, cities that have an efficient and integrated system of transit, also boast
higher productivity levels (Nelson & Peterman, 2000). Second, denser areas may hold the
economic benefit of agglomeration, increasing labor productivity. Finally, there is evidence
of unmet demand in city centers, both for walkable residential communities as well as for
retail. The Initiative for a Competitive Inner City (ICIC) estimates that about 25% of inner city
retail demand is unmet (National Association of Local Government Environmental & Smart
Growth Leadership, 2004).
6 Decision Science and Land Use Practices
6.1 What practices best support these land use qualities?
Where do we go from here? With the era of sprawl came the belief that single-use zoning
was the best method for land development and the desire to avoid mixing of uses.
Traditionally, factories and industry were built near the city. This provided an adequate
labor pool within a reasonable commute to and from work. Thanks to advances in
manufacturing and pollution control, there is now less need for industry to be separate
from other zoning categories. An alternative to sprawl would be the concentration of
120
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
people, resources, and economic activity. High population densities and compact urban
design support walkable neighborhoods and mass transit alternatives to the automobile.
Empirical evidence suggest that developing at higher population and employment densities
results in closer trip origins and destinations, on average, and thus in shorter trip lengths, on
average. This compact urban development coupled with high residential and employment
densities can reduce energy consumption, vehicle miles traveled, and carbon dioxide (C02)
emissions (National Research Council, 2009). Concentrated populations can also save land
for agriculture, wildlife, and habitat by using less land for urban development (Seto, et al.,
2010). In addition, several sustainability advantages of cities and urban areas with larger
populations are the economics of scale in terms of providing infrastructure, education,
healthcare, transportation and sanitation services (L. Bettencourt, Lobo, Helbing, Kuhnert,
& West, 2007) as well as increasing returns from innovation and productivity; and
economies of scale in energy use, carbon emissions, and infrastructure provision (Seto et al.,
2010). Rural communities too, may benefit from more compact development. Clustering
rural development has been shown to not only reduce the open space consumed, but also
reduce impervious surfaces, typically by 10-15% (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 2001).
Recently, a number of related and overlapping philosophies for designing healthy
neighborhoods have developed, including smart growth, New Urbanism, traditional
neighborhood design, transit-oriented development, lifelong communities, cluster
development, conservation development, and infill development. What these philosophies
have in common is the promotion of a mix of uses and housing types in a form compact
enough to support walking and bicycling for short trips. And there is some evidence they
effect change. Metropolitan areas with reform oriented zoning and conservation funding
have lower land consumption per capita (R. I. McDonald, et al., 2010).
Growth controls have gained traction to curb the unfettered expansion of suburban
development. These include a variety of strategies to restrict or incentivize development
within the boundaries of the existing municipal infrastructure networks. Development
already is hastened in areas with infrastructure provided, and this approach can be
successful at counteracting the tendency to construct residential uses close to open space
and far from high density areas (Irwin & Bockstael, 2004).
However if demand exceeds the supply of eligible parcels, very restrictive growth controls
can cause development to leapfrog to neighboring jurisdiction. Such a pattern can
exacerbate traffic congestion, drain tax funds, or unintentionally burden neighboring
jurisdictions with the same concerns. To gain the environmental and public health benefits
of minimizing sprawl, while avoiding leapfrog development, it is suggested best practice to
increase allowable residential densities within the service area, which reduces demand to
build housing outside the jurisdiction (Phillips & Goodstein, 2007). Practices such as a
transfer of development rights (TDR) can aid in this goal (Nelson, 2012). This can be
121
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
achieved without costing property owners who would rather sell their land. The mechanism
allows an agricultural or open space land owner outside the growth boundary to sell their
rights to develop to a landowner in a designated development zone. Typically this transfer
allows the buyer to build to a higher density than would have otherwise been permitted,
and requires the farm owner to enter into a permanent conservation easement.
Achieving a balance between incentivizing compact development and preventing leapfrog
development remains a challenge for community planners, one which may benefit from
tools to aid coordinated regional planning and scenario modeling.
A few of the practices with generous research supporting their benefits are discussed below.
• Comprehensive plans and sustainability plans. According to an APA survey of 890
local planning department staff found that 27% of jurisdictions had officially adopted
comprehensive plans that address public health, while only 3% had sustainability
plans that addressed public health (Hodgson, 2011). This illustrates a both a tepid
adoption of sustainability plans (less than 16%) as well as a lack of general
recognition of the interdependent nature of land use sustainability and human well-
being. While topics such as recreation, public safety, clean water and air, and active
transportation were present in over half of comprehensive plans, very few (less than
10%) addressed obesity prevention, social capital, mental health, food security, and
health disparities.
• Compact development. Many professional and political institutions, including the
Urban Land Institute, the American Planning Association, the President's Council on
Sustainable Development, the European Environment Agency, the United Nations,
and the National Research Council, support the conclusion that a compact city form
is more sustainable than a disperse one. Compact development conserves more land,
improves air quality, increase biodiversity, and improves traffic safety, and leads to
less driving, lower GHG emissions, fewer extreme heat events, and lower public
infrastructure costs. Tradeoffs include the potential for higher congestion, more
local exposure to air pollutants, higher housing prices, and a mixed impact on
commute times.
• Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is defined as a "combination of procedures,
methods, and tools that systematically judges the potential, and sometimes
unintended effects of a policy, plan, program or project on the health of a
population and the distribution of those effects within the population (Quigley et al.,
2006)." In addition, HIAs typically provide optimal management actions to address
the effects identified given complex tradeoffs (de Nazelle et al., 2011). Because they
provide decision makers with explicit measures of impacts and recommended
actions, they can be useful in garnering additional funds for a project (Ross et al.,
122
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
2012). Such assessments can be very useful to determine in advance any overlooked
environmental justice consequences to a project. This HIA methodology is relatively
new, however is rapidly gaining traction (Wernham, 2011). For example, the Healthy
Development Measurement Tool has spread to multiple cities in just a few years.
• Infill development is development of new uses in a previously developed area. It
may involve increasing the intensity of use of a parcel, developing unused land that
is surrounded by development, or repurposing previous development to a new use.
Infill development can relieve development pressure on outlying undeveloped areas,
improve city center vitality, improve walkability, and can benefit from existing
infrastructure. Infill can be more challenging and potentially more costly than
greenfield development due to the need to remove existing structures, clean-up
existing sites, and piece together multiple parcels for sufficient space. However the
benefits of infill may be catching on. In nearly 75% of large metropolitan areas
between 2000 to 2009, infill housing development (new housing in previously
developed areas) grew as a share of all new housing (US Environmental Protection
Agency, 2012b). Infill is a strategy to help alleviate development pressure on
agricultural land, keep development within the bounds of existing infrastructure,
reduce reliance on wells and septic systems, and promote a compact development
pattern.
• Brownfield redevelopment is a type of infill development that is particularly
challenged by the added difficulty of existing land contamination that must first be
cleaned up. Brownfield sites are typically abandoned or unused sites that formerly
housed industrial or commercial facilities and now may contain hazardous
substances. Reinvesting in brownfields has the potential to transform a community
blight into a community asset. Brownfields redevelopments play an important role in
improved land use decisions. By redeveloping formerly contaminated sites land in
urban areas is put to reuse, rather than development consuming previously
undeveloped lands and contributing to sprawl. A redevelopment project also
presents the chance to develop using smart growth principles that increase urban
density, provide the opportunity to build more sustainably, and revitalize urban
cores. Ancillary benefits include stimulating businesses and providing jobs, both the
temporary construction-related jobs and permanent jobs at the redeveloped sites.
The EPA Brownfields Program (http://epa.gov/brownfields/) leverages multiple
sources of funding to spur brownfield redevelopment in communities around the
nation.
• Mixed housing types and ages may promote diversity in neighborhoods by
economics and life stages. This can be fostered though form-based codes, allowing
123
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
and encouraging multi-family buildings in formerly single-family zones, link high and
low diversity neighborhoods by revitalizing the transitional areas with public spaces,
(Talen, 2008) while ensuring neighborhood improvement efforts don't displace low
income residents due to rising property values. Metropolitan areas with more
mixed-income neighborhoods have higher rates of upward mobility (Chetty,
Hendren, Kline, & Saez, 2013). Density however has an ambiguous relationship with
diversity. Jane Jacobs promoted the two as linked, however highly dense areas can
also be homogenous.
• Transit oriented development (TOD). Transit-oriented developments situate a mix
of housing and commercial uses within a % mile to a transit stop or hub. This
philosophy focuses on reducing traffic and automobile dependency. It is likely that
such developments command a premium in the marketplace. TOD has quantified
potential to reduce GHG emissions. The Center for Transit-oriented Development
has estimated that living in a TOD will on average reduce a household's driving
related GHG emissions by 30% to 78%, depending upon the location efficiency rank
of the development (Haas, 2010). Driving related emissions account for about 17%
of total United States C02 emissions. To support sufficient rides for rail stations,
density well above the typical suburban development is necessary. Typical suburban
developments are generally in the range of 2-6 units per acre and New Urbanist
style single family neighborhoods typically range from 8-12 units per acre(National
Association of Local Government Environmental & Smart Growth Leadership, 2004).
The latter density reaches the threshold for a High Medium Location Efficient Transit
Zone as identified by the Center for Transit-Oriented Development (Haas, 2010). To
pass the threshold for the 2 highest location efficient transit zones, residential
densities need to reach 30 units per acre. Studies of homeowner preferences
indicate that this is an attainable goal., and safe places for children to.
• Traditional neighborhood development (TND) refers to construction of an entire
neighborhood according to guidelines promoted by New Urbanism such as a mix of
uses, small setbacks, homes with front porches, well connected streets, and public
spaces. Though TND may occur on infill sites, in practice, they are often constructed
on previously undeveloped land. Developments classified as new urbanist in style
have been shown to be more effective in incorporating watershed protection
techniques than conventional developments TNDs are more likely to incorporate
impervious surface reduction techniques and restore degraded stream
environments (P. R. Berke et al., 2003). New Urbanist neighborhoods in the study
were, on average, two and half times denser than conventional developments, with
7.18 dwellings per acre versus the conventional 2.77 dwelling units per acre.
124
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Urban parks and green space have the potential to improve both mental and
physical health as well as concentration and learning. They can also contribute to
community cohesiveness and a sense of safety. By improving property values,
boosting tourism and shopping, and reducing expenditures on grey infrastructure,
urban green space can contribute positively to a city's economic outlook. Urban
green space can play an important role in mitigating some of the negative effects
that urbanization has inflicted on natural ecosystems. Environmental factors that are
important to humans, such as clean air, clean water, urban heat islands, and carbon
emission, are improved by native vegetation in the urban landscape. There is not a
one-size fits all approach to greening urban space. Whether on a site, landscape, or
city-wide scale, attention to environmental characteristics as well as human
perceptions and needs across socio-economic groups makes for successful outcomes.
• Low impact development. With rapid urbanization, water problems like flooding,
water pollution, and watershed degradation have become an obstacle for urban
sustainability. The implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) Best
Management Practices (BMPs) including impervious pavement, grass swales, filter
strip/buffer, bioretention cells, and stormwater wetlands has been recommended.
The concept of LID BMPs has been around for some time, although it has not been
widely implemented. Several barriers exist including evidence for the effects of
individual LID BMPs, the lack of an urban runoff simulation model for LID BMPs, LID
BMPs planning, and the guidelines and technical codes. The lack of technical
guidelines for designing, implementing, and managing LID BMPs prevents its wide
application. Therefore, continued research, development of guidelines for designing,
implementing and managing of LID BMPs would promote adoption of this concept.
6.2 ORD Recent and Planned Products Relevant to Land Use Decisions and
Sustainability
Many of the research programs within the Office of Research and Development, including
SHC, ACE, SSWR, and CSS, are already in the process of developing valuable tools and
research that will support decision making around land use and address critical land use
issues. The SHC Research Program is focusing on quantifying ecosystem goods and services
produced by land, measuring impacts of land use choices, and providing collaborative
decision support tools. ACE and SSWR has developed useful tools to compare alternative
scenarios. Such tools can provide communities with the means to address critical issues
identified in this document including negotiating the desired balance of compact
development, local and regional air quality, impervious surfaces, green infrastructure, and
open space.
For example, the EnviroAtlas and the Urban Atlas are GIS-based tools that map geography,
demographics, and the production of ecosystem services, including toxics removed through
125
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
tree coverage, ecosystems contributing to water quality, carbon sequestration, impervious
surfaces, habitat, ecosystems that support food and fiber production, ecosystems which help
mitigate natural disaster.
These tools directly address a need to expand beyond mapping land use and land cover, to
mapping land function, including the ecosystem services derived from land (Verburg, van de
Steeg, Veldkamp, & Willemen, 2009). Applications that are user friendly and don't require a
skilled user are especially valued as a means to open the door for complex and more detailed
considerations of ecosystem services and environmental justice in the everyday planning
process.
Some of the future research in SHC is expected to support in depth understanding of the
ecosystem services derived from land. The Ecological Production Function Library will define
and catalogue ecological production functions. This product will be a resource for
researchers and modelers to develop tools that quantify the ecosystem services benefits and
losses expected from various land use decisions. The database is expected to be fully
available online in March, 2015.
The Integrated Climate and Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS) Online, developed by ACE, maps
population and housing density scenarios through the year 2100 and models the impacts on
climate change and land use change scenarios. Compact development has been identified as
an important indicator of the land use sustainability of community. The ICLUS tool allows
communities to estimate and visualize the long range impacts of more compact or less
compact development on local and regional climate and land consumption. The underlying
data is also available and could feed more complex tools to address site-specific community
needs.
Future planned research in ACE is expected to address another critical community land use
issue: adapting to climate change. The work will provide communities with a method to
assess their ecosystem resilience to climate change through standardized metrics, and to
identify particularly vulnerable sectors such as human health, water quality (ACE 163).
In SSWR, a site-based storm water calculator has been published online that estimates
amount and frequency of storm water runoff from a specific site. It allows users to compare
a variety of land use scenarios, including no development, impervious development, and
varying levels of green infrastructure. Green infrastructure as a land use best practice can
advance multiple pillars of sustainability, including reducing infrastructure and cooling costs,
improving water quality, enhancing mental well-being, and more. This tool supports
community use of green infrastructure by providing feedback on when and where Gl is most
valuable.
Future planned research in SSWR, in conjunction with SHC, will provide direct guidance to
communities on the most beneficial green infrastructure practices for their needs. This
product will be of direct use to community decision makers, property owners, and
126
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
developers. Research in CSS also touches on land use issues at the community scale,
including work to determine the risks and treatment options for bio-waste in landfills (CSS
4.1.3) and software to support sustainable industrial supply chains (CSS 5.2.4).
Below, we identify the current and planned research in ORD that is especially relevant to
land use and sustainability. The work is then compared to the research needs that emerged
from the literature review to identify gaps between current research and research needs.
This analysis may be a useful guide for future work.
6.2.1 Quantification of Ecosystem Goods and Services, Human Health Impacts,
and Identification of Thresholds and Tipping points
A broad field of environmental scientists and engineers are contributing expertise to
research on land use sustainability. To further the usefulness of tools, models, and best
practices, quantification of EGS is a necessary first step towards modeling linkages between
the form of development and the functions critical to sustaining human life and the
ecological systems.
• A collection of 15 papers on disproportionate health risks has been published as a
product of SHC Task 2.2.3.5 in a supplemental issue of American Journal of Public
Health. This issue resulted from an EPA sponsored symposium in 2010 on factors
leading to disproportionate health risks. Some of the articles most relevant to land
use address the health effects and disproportionate exposure to noxious land uses
and health impact assessments as a process to explicitly consider equity in
community decision-making. Several of these papers are cited throughout this land
use synthesis paper. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/toc/ajph/101/Sl
• A review of existing Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) is being conducted in SHC
Task 2.2.1.6. The review is intended to: (1) inventory the types of community level
decisions represented in HIAs in the sectors of transportation,
housing/buildings/infrastructure, land use and waste management/revitalization, (2)
assess the data, tools and models used in current HIAs for the four sectors, (3)
crosswalk with existing Community Public Health and SHC tools, models and
approaches that could have supported the HIA efforts, and (4) identify potential
research focus areas to support and improve the HIA community of practice. The
anticipated review will inform HIA case studies being conducted in conjunction with
Region 1 and Region 4.
• A report titled Neighborhood Scale Quantification of Ecosystem Goods and
Services will be released by SHC Task 2.1.4.1. The report provides ecosystem goods
and services production functions for two alternative neighborhood development
strategies, one which emphasizes green space and a suburban setting, and the
second which emphasizes traditional neighborhood design and walkability. The
127
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
report will be of interest to community decision makers, developers, and city and
regional planners interested in how alternative development strategies affect the
provision of a variety of ecosystem goods and services.
• A peer reviewed report of selected ecosystem services provided by coastal
wetlands of the Laurentian Great Lakes was produced by SHC Task 2.1.4.4. The
report reviews the evidence for ecosystem services produced by the coastal
wetlands of the Great Lakes including carbon sequestration, sport and commercial
fish, retaining sediments and wild rice production. Their research has highlighted a
need we also find: to identify quantitative relationships between land use decisions
and the delivery of ecosystem services.
• Several peer-reviewed publications that quantify, value, and estimate the
production of ecosystem goods and services from Tampa Bay coastal areas have
been produced by SHC Task 2.1.4.1. This science informs decisions about the use of
coastal land, and estimates the impacts of conserving, restoring, and developing the
land. The science also feeds decision making tools which can provide a convenient
link to the information.
• A report on sparrow counts in Rhode Island, developed by SHC Task 2.1.4.3, shows
a marked decrease in sparrow counts in Rl salt marshes since 1982 and finds
anecdotal evidence that natural buffers of 150m protects against this loss. This adds
to the evidence showing impacts on biodiversity from development, and the
possible protective value of natural buffers surrounding sensitive ecosystems.
• A publication on the effects of urbanization on migrating birds on the western
shore of Lake Michigan has been presented at the American Ornithologists Union.
The study looked at spring migration in the Chicago region to analyze the effects of
urbanization on migrating birds. The authors considered the impacts of forest patch
size, distance to the Lake Michigan coastline, and surrounding urban context (urban
and suburban). However, they found no simple relationships between landscape
characteristics and the migratory movements and concluded more research is
necessary.
• Vapor Intrusion Assessment. Vapor intrusion is a potential exposure pathway for
sites with subsurface contamination. Because EPA and state cleanup programs
often leave residual contamination at sites, vapor intrusion potentially impacts
residences and businesses at contaminated sites and may present a barrier to
redevelopment of brownfields sites. Brownfields reuse is a component of land use
that can lead to improved communities. SHC project 3.1.2 and task 3.1.4.5 contain
128
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
work on assessing the impacts of subsurface contamination. Project 3.1.2 produced
a report on the fluctuation of indoor radon and volatile organic contaminant
concentrations due to seasonal variation in building and climate factors. Task
3.1.4.5 which supports the office of underground storage tanks has produced work
that addresses site characterization for vapor intrusion, monitoring methods to
reduce costs and modeling that includes an automated uncertainty analysis to avoid
previously publicized problems with model use at vapor intrusion sites.
6.2.2 Defining, Measuring and Tracking
Sustainability is a lofty and esoteric goal, however the impacts of community choices on
people, the environment, and livelihoods are distinct and often measureable. Metrics and
indicators help communities define their current status and track progress towards
commonly defined goals.
• Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Classification System (FEGS-CS), under
development within SHC Task 2.1.1.1, provides a standardized measurement system
for classifying ecosystem goods and services according to beneficiaries and allows
for comparison of ecosystem goods and services across geographies and scales. This
tool is a large step forward towards answering many of the research needs identified
in this report and will be a resource for researchers and modelers to develop more
consistent EGS quantification tools that can scale up or down depending upon
whether the decision is to be made at the neighborhood, municipal, regional, or
state scale. A parallel framework called the National Ecosystem Services
Classification System (NESCS) is being developed to connect final EGS to human
welfare through cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and distribution analyses.
• An Ecological Production Function Library is in development by SHC Task 2.1.2.1.
EGS production functions are essential to geographically specific decision making
tools that value environmental benefits from various land uses. Consequently, this
effort is a key input for community decision support tools. This product will be a
resource for researchers and modelers to develop tools that quantify the ecosystem
services benefits and losses expected from various land use decisions. The database
is expected to be fully available online in March, 2015.
• A Primer of Scaling Approaches and Analyses Useful in Ecosystem Management
was produced by SHC Task 2.1.2.4. While it is focused on resource management and
doesn't address land use specifically, it may be useful for modelers and statisticians
who must deal with variations in scale. Moreover the task includes ongoing work
measuring ecosystem production and benefit functions. This work is very important
to inform the development of decision making tools that can estimate the impact on
129
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
ecosystem goods and services in response to land conversion.
• A database of sustainability indicators and indices (DOSII) is being produced by SHC
Task 1.2.2.1. Land use is one of the community scale indicator categories covered in
the database. This database will be a valuable resource for researchers,
sustainability index developers, modelers, and sophisticated municipal planning
offices looking to define their own benchmarks and characterize land use trends in
sustainability.
• A comparative analysis of community typologies is being developed within SHC
Task 2.1.2.2 to guide decision analysis approaches for sustainability. Different
communities face different challenges for achieving sustainability. These challenges
reflect the interplay between the geographic, environmental, social, and economic
factors that help distinguish different places, and which contribute to the relative
sustainability of a particular place. The typologies task seeks to build a basic
classification methodology for community sustainability using statistical analysis of
national-level datasets (Phase 1), which will then be refined in more focused
collaborative work with Regional offices and a suite of pilot communities (Phase
2). The aim is to create a meaningful representation of different sustainability
trajectories linked to key community characteristics, capabilities, policies and
programs, and stressors. This product will ensure that decision tools developed in
ORD for community sustainability will take a systems-based perspective that is
adaptable and responsive to different decision contexts.
• The Report on the Environment, released every 4 years by SHC Project 3.4.1,
describes recent trends in land use and land cover and tracks changes in 85 land use
and land condition indicators including land cover of various types, ecological
condition of undeveloped land and developed land relative to population change. It
is a valuable resource for researchers, land use planners, natural resource managers
and policy makers to refer to for recent national trends in land use, land cover, and
ecological functioning. The list of indicators used to track these trends may be useful
to modelers and sustainability index developers looking for standard metrics with
solid data sources.
• An Environmental Quality Index (EQI) for all U.S. counties is being developed in SHC
Task 1.2.2.3 that will combine measures in five domains: air, land, water, built
environment, and sociodemographic (Lobdell, Jagai, Rappazzo, & Messer, 2011). The
index will be expanded for use at smaller scales including the city and neighborhood
scale, and eventually will be merged with the Human Well Being Index described
130
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
below to create a comprehensive picture of the interaction of the environment,
human health, and welfare.
• A Human Well Being Index (HWBI) is being developed in SHC Task 1.2.2.2 to
characterize the flow of services that contribute to economic, social, and
environmental well being. Modifications of the index will be made for specific needs,
indluding a tribal well-being index and an index of social equity. The indices feed a
visualization tool that will use community prioritization of values as an input to help
community decision-makers and stakeholders better understand how decisions
could potentially affect different aspects of well-being using. The final index is
expected to be released near the end of 2014.
• Common sustainability metrics and are catalogued in a report that ranks the 50
most populous cities in US based upon these metrics (SHC Task 2.2.1.1). They
conclude that the inclusion or exclusion of sustainability metrics has a large impact
on the rank ordering of cities, over and above the health and environmental
rankings alone. This product may be a useful resource not only for researchers and
sustainability index developers, but also for community decision makers to make the
case that tracking sustainability will improve local outcomes.
• Image Analysis Support for Green Infrastructure Projects is being conducted in
SSWR Task 4.2B. The research uses LIDAR to develop a methodology that more
accurately estimates percent impervious cover. Preliminary analyses have indicated
that biotic communities are impacted at much lower levels of watershed
imperviousness than previously thought. It is likely that 30-meter resolution National
Land cover Data is underestimating impervious surfaces, particularly in suburban
areas where tree cover and vegetation can mask it. This research will improve
classification accuracy and allow better estimates of threshold levels of impervious
surfaces for biotic integrity in urban and suburban riparian zones.
Geographically specific metrics and indicators are of particular use to communities, for an
abundance of purposes, including to help identify and prioritize areas of particular concern
and to understand the geographic context of decisions.
• EnviroAtlas, in SHC Project 1.2.3, is a GIS tool called the, which maps geography,
demographics, and the production of ecosystem services, including toxins removed
through tree coverage, ecosystems contributing to water quality, carbon
sequestration, impervious surfaces, habitat, ecosystems that support food and fiber
production, ecosystems which help mitigate natural disaster, and prevalence of
recreational ecosystems. Future releases plan to include more information such as
built environment measures, transportation, waste, and urban land use. These data
131
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
are then combined with measured data and models to estimate condition and value
of these resources. The Atlas is intuitively designed and does not require expertise
to navigate its basic functions, therefore it is a resource for a wide variety of users,
including local decision makers, natural resource managers, public health
professionals, and more. This SHC tool begins to answer the call from some
researcher for tools to map land use function, rather than just land use and cover
(Verburg, et al., 2009). The Urban Atlas, a component of the EnviroAtlas project, is a
GIS mapping tool called the Urban Atlas, which will initially cover 50 cities across the
U.S. The tool will map the many ecosystem services including "temperature
regulation, filtering of pollutants from the air, filtering of water, protections of
quality and supply of drinking water, access to nature and open space, and potential
for food production." In addition human health and well-being variables will be
included to assess risks from heat waves, air pollution from traffic, flooding, algal
blooms, contamination of drinking and recreational waters, and lack of opportunity
for physical exercise, outdoor experience and play. This information can be overlaid
with a variety of demographic variables, allowing detailed analysis of
disproportionate exposure to identify possible local environmental justice issues.
6.2.3 Comparing Alternative Scenarios
With a growing population, dwindling land reserves, and distinct evidence for a variety of
environmental, social, human health, and economic impacts that vary based on context,
community decision makers have need of decision-support tools that allow comparison of
multiple options based on local conditions.
• The Integrated Climate and Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS) Online is an online mapping
tool developed by ACE Task 137. The tool maps US population and housing density
scenarios through 2100 to create estimates of impacts on climate and land use
change scenarios. Scenarios and underlying data will be useful for regional planners,
local governments, state agencies, non-profit organizations, and universities
interested in long range local, statewide, regional or national analyses.
• A dataset developed by ACE Task 155 takes regional land use patterns into account
to downscale a model to show the regional effects of climate change. The
downscaled climate fields can then be used to predict the regional impacts of
climate change on air quality and human health, water quality and availability,
ecosystems, energy demand, and agriculture. Though this product is of indirect
relevance to land use decision making, it is necessary to make global climate change
models more relevant for regional land use decision makers.
• An add-on tool to the USDA Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) Tool,
developed by ACE, allows users to assess the sensitivity of soil erosion to climate
132
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
change. This tool helps users identify the potential changes in soil erosion from a
farm field in a particular location resulting from a range of plausible, mid 21st
century changes in climatic conditions. It may be useful for watershed modelers, and
as an input into more comprehensive models, to highlight how climate change may
affect local land use concerns. However, its use is limited to specialists as it requires
knowledge of the USDA WEPP model.
• A Site-Based Stormwater Calculator, produced by SSWR Task 7.1A is an online
calculator that estimates amount and frequency of stormwater runoff from a
specific site under a variety of land use scenarios. This tool is an online calculator
that will estimate the annual amount and frequency of storm-water runoff from a
specific site based on local soil conditions, land cover, and historical rainfall records.
This can be simulated under a variety of land-use scenarios. Watershed modelers at
the local and state level will find this a valuable tool to identify site-specific land use
and green infrastructure improvements can prevent or reduce urban stormwater
runoff and its consequences, http://www.epa.gov/research/waterscience/water-
models-data-tools.htm
• Guidance on municipal level best practices and a database on green infrastructure
(Gl) BMPs are being developed by SSWR 4.2.A.3 and SHC 1.1.1.3. The product will
provide: (1) a database of Gl tools, resources, and associated benefits along with
other attributes to aid users in finding tools/resources based on their decision
context and needs (2) analysis of municipal characteristics and practices (nation-
wide) that result in higher adoption of Gl practices, and (3) a report synthesizing
best practices and providing recommendations and methods for municipalities. This
product will be direct use to community decision makers, property owners,
developers, and more.
• Advanced Subsurface Transport Modeling. SHC project 3.1.5 is developing an
advanced approach to subsurface contaminant transport modeling for the purpose
of assessing potential impacts on drinking water wells due to population growth,
natural cycles of wet and dry years and climate change. Multiple sources, types of
sources and receptors can be included in the model, including a link with models for
vapor intrusion. The model is intended as a management tool for assessing impacts
to community water supplies and can be used in developing a source water
protection plan.
• A suite of decision support tools for communities will be created in SHC Task 1.2.1.3.
The goal is to develop tools that allow full value accounting that meet critical
community level needs. This effort will fill a gap identified in this review for decision
133
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
support tools that allow full cost and benefit accounting.
6.2.4 Collaborative Decision-Making
The local decisions that dictate the specific use of the land may favor development, resource
extraction, or agricultural uses or they may emphasize protection and preservation. Either
path may enhance the quality of lives of the citizens of the community, or they may result in
degradation and loss of value and quality. Each parcel of land is unique and each
community must balance land use decisions against the community's fundamental goals for
development. In order to achieve this, the process for evaluating options and making
decisions must be transparent, inclusive, and capable of evolving over time as priorities
change. A long history of community planning has concluded that development and plans
that have community buy in perform best. With increasingly diverse stakeholder groups,
community decision makers need user friendly tools to help specialists, planners, community
leaders, stakeholder groups, and citizens communicate well, prioritize issues, visualize
alternatives, and explore solutions to achieve common goals.
• DASEES (Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Environment, Economy, and Society),
in SHCTask 1.1.1.2, is a decision support tool .The tool is a stakeholder collaboration
tool that guides users through a decision analysis framework to help participants
build common understanding of complex problems and identify solutions. This tool
helps communities collaboratively answer the questions "Which values are
important to my community and what decisions help to reach those values?" It is
intended to be adaptable to address specific sustainability issues that arise from the
Theme 4 decision sectors. It is adaptable both in regards to the problems it analyzes
and the scale of the issue, which are user defined. A prototype of the tool usable by
experienced modelers will be available in September 2013, however, a user-friendly
version that includes a menu of common decisions communities make should be
available online near the end of 2014.
• The C(ommunity)-Focused Exposure and Risk Screening Tool (C-FERST) and Tribal-
FERST is being developed in SHC Task 2.2.1.5. These web-based decision support
tools are designed to help identify and prioritize local environmental issues. They are
still in development however they have great relevance to land use. The tools allow
users to: follow walk-through guidance and strategies for conducting community
and tribal assessments; identify relevant local environmental issues; download
information on these issues; map 5 exposures and risks; prioritize their community's
issues; explore potential solutions; and link to other community-relevant tools
including EPA/ORD's EnviroAtlas. T-FERST and C-FERST are emerging tools that will
help decision makers identify environmental health issues in their communities,
identify priorities in the context of limited resources and competing interests and
134
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
address them effectively.
• The Community Cumulative Assessment Tool (CCAT), in SHC Task 2.2.3.5 walks
users through the steps of an assessment process that integrates cumulative risk
assessment (CRA) and Environmental Justice (EJ) concepts. The tool will help score
and prioritize specific public health risks by location, including housing, playground,
and school locations. It also explains uncertainties to lay users. This tool is a resource
for community public health professionals and local decision-makers who are
interested in tracking and addressing the environmental health issues and
environmental justice concerns that may be present it their community, but are
unsure of where to start.
• A green infrastructure planning framework, being developed by SSWR Task 4.1.A.1,
aims to incorporate economic data and stakeholder and citizen preferences into the
planning of green infrastructure in neighborhoods and communities. The
classification framework will be applicable for communities nation-wide. It will be
integrated with SHC work on decision analysis to provide a suite of tools for
decision-making by communities. The framework and tools will show the benefits of
implementing green infrastructure while meeting stakeholder goals. The final
decision analysis tool will be populated for typical decision scenarios that can utilize
Gl solution.
For information on land use planning and decision support tools not produced within EPA's
Office of Research and Development, please see Appendix B.
7 Research Needs to Address Community Land Use
SUSTAINABILITY
The research needs identified through the literature review can be summarized by several
primary needs.
• How do we best measure the impacts of land use choices?
o Some researchers advocate a change in focus from mapping land use and
land cover, to mapping land function, including the ecosystem services
derived from land. This will aid in studying the nonlinear relations between
land use and land functions (Verburg et a I, 2009).
o What are the best indicators and metrics for park usage and physical activity
rates?
o Development of a standardized, universally accepted definition of sprawl
could speed development of useful metrics for sprawl (E. H. Wilson, et al.,
2003; Wolman, etal., 2005).
135
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o Although traffic-accident injuries and deaths among motor-vehicle occupants
are often reported on a per-vehicle-mile-traveled basis, there is less
consistency in how the risk of being in a traffic accident is reported for
pedestrians and cyclists.
• What are the thresholds of land use characteristics to achieve sustainable
outcomes?
o What combination of density and compactness leads to the least overall
energy consumption? Studies like Holden and Norland, 2005 are lacking in
the U.S. context.
o What is the highest residential density different consumer groups will
tolerate?
o What is the mix of density and transit necessary to avoid congestion in
compact towns and cities?
o Characterization of the density thresholds and magnitude for agglomeration
benefits. The association between urban forest cover and improved air
quality is primarily supported by models rather than experimental data
(Cavanagh, et al., 2009). More experimental research is needed to identify
the thresholds and conditions of urban forest cover to achieve air quality
benefits.
o What are the thresholds of preserved natural areas necessary to maintain
biotic integrity? Though this has been done for forests, it would be very
valuable to have analogous research conducted for other biomes and
replicative studies to confirm initial findings.
o Though habitat corridors have been shown to be a valuable tool in regional
settings, only recently has there been empirical evidence that linking habitats
in urban settings improves biodiversity (Ignatieva, et al., 2011). More
research to identify connectivity thresholds and document the benefits of
connectivity in an urban setting would be valuable.
o How much intact urban forest is required to offset the impact of a given area
of impervious surface (National Research Council, 2013)?
• Quantify the impacts of land use decisions on the production of ecosystem goods
and services
o A peer reviewed article, produced by SHC Task 2.1.4.4, reviewed the
evidence for ecosystem services produced by the coastal wetlands of the
Great Lakes including carbon sequestration, sport and commercial fish,
retaining sediments and wild rice production. They find a research need very
relevant to the topic of land conversion: to identify quantitative relationships
between land use decisions and the delivery of ecosystem services (Sierszen,
Morrice, Trebitz, & Hoffman, 2012)
136
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o What is the impact of compact, transit oriented development on exposure to
air pollution?
o Does impervious surface cover increase in response to increased walkability
due to denser road network and wider streets to accommodate sidewalks?
o What are the levels of water-related energy use in the commercial sector?
(Kenway, et al., 2011)
o Research is necessary to provides estimates of stormwater runoff, GHG
emissions, and energy consumption specific to the United States,
o What, in relation to urban form, are the required quantity, quality and
configuration of urban green spaces to maintain, sustain and enhance
ecosystem services and ecological function compatible with other functions?
(James, et al., 2009)
o How can the provision and management of fresh- water quantity and quality
be promoted through urban green spaces? (James et al., 2009)
o Quantify urban forest benefits to the point at which they can meet
regulatory requirements for air and water pollution mitigation efforts
(National Research Council, 2013).
• Identify ideal levels for land use indicators
o To date, Transit-Oriented Development research has focused more on the
policy tools that can be used to create them than on appropriate ways to
design them or appropriate transportation mode shares to plan for (Jacobson
& Forsyth, 2008).
o What are the most appropriate ways to design Transit-Oriented
Developments
o What transportation mode shares in TODs are realistic to aim for given
different contexts?
o Define ideal guidelines, analogous to ideal body weight, for land use mix,
walkability, proximity to greenspace, and more (A. L. Dannenberg, et al.,
2003).
o Improve predictive accuracy of land use change modeling
o Modeling land use change (LUC) with accuracy is difficult. A review of 13
popular peer reviewed land use change modeling applications found that
almost all (12), predicted more pixels inaccurately than accurately (Pontius et
al, 2008). In order to be able to quantitatively compare alternative land use
patterns, it is critical to be able to accurately model how intervention X
changes land use. Poor model prediction limits the ability to assess the likely
effectiveness of remedies. Therefore, advancing LUC modeling is a critical
land use research need. A more complex modeling approach, such as the
cellular automata referred to here, may provide different insights but does
not necessarily improve accuracy over a simpler model.
137
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Quantitatively compare alternative land use patterns
o Several reviewers have underscored the lack of consensus on the ideal urban
form for sustainability, and in particular, a lack of theory to allow rigorous
comparison of alternative urban forms (Jabareen, 2006; Tomita, Terashima,
Hammad, & Hayashi, 2003).
o Most studies to date that measure the impacts of urbanization on ecological
systems use simple measures such as population density or percent
impervious surface. This leaves a critical gaps in the science; as Alberti
identifies, we do not know the specific effects of "different urban forms,
densities, land use mix, and alternative infrastructures" nor the differential
effects of "clustered versus dispersed and monocentric versus polycentric
urban structures" (M. Alberti, 2010)..
o Various social equity variables have been associated with density and
compactness. However the most recent literature review in 2000 found weak
evidence to support a positive connection between density and better access
to public services and green space, and ambiguous evidence for increased
access to jobs (Burton, 2000). Since this study was conducted in 2000, an
updated review of the literature would be very valuable, particularly if it can
identify density tipping points in the literature,
o How do large preserved areas impact land use patterns in developed areas?
Is their siting likely to cause leapfrog development styles or increased
commute times?
o What is the magnitude of the tradeoff between elevated local emissions and
reduced regional emissions due to compact versus dispersed development,
and to what degree can it be mitigated through green infrastructure?
o Impervious surfaces must be measured on a per capita basis, rather than a
per unit area basis to evaluate the impact of compact development on
impervious surfaces. However research explicitly comparing the impervious
surface loads of compact versus dispersed regions is lacking,
o Cost of community service studies categorize land uses into discreet
categories, and therefore have yet to address a mix of uses. There is a need
for studies that address the revenues, infrastructure, and community service
costs of mixed-uses.
o Research to understand the differential ecosystem-level effects of alternative
road networks (Coffin, 2007).
o Though rural residential clustering is promoted as a smart growth strategy
suited to the rural context, relatively little peer reviewed research exists
comparing its impacts to alternative forms. Particularly, is residential
clustering able to reduce exposure to pollutants such as pesticides and other
agricultural runoff?
138
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o Compact development concentrates higher PTIA over a smaller area, which
may reduce the region wide levels of impervious surfaces, but may allow very
high impervious surface cover in very populated areas. Research to quantify
the advantages and disadvantages inherent in this tradeoff would be a
valuable contribution to the literature.
• Provide decision support tools to allow full cost and benefit accounting
o Civic balance sheets that incorporate co-benefits of community goods, such
as parks, so that they are quantitatively shown as valuable assets rather than
fiscal liabilities. This enables resources to be allocated appropriately
according to the public benefits received (Lambert, 2007). However
achieving this goal is often beyond the means of community governments.
Tools are needed which allow estimates of full costs and benefits for a
variety of land use options.
• Provide decision support tools to predict how land use changes will affect growth
and development pattern
o Tools to help community planners achieving a balance between incentivizing
compact development and preventing leapfrog development
o Models to understand and predict the "interactions between road network
structures and landscapes" (Coffin, 2007)
• Provide user friendly decision support tools
o User friendly tools for quick integration into the planning process "Many of
the tools available to communities to support decision-making processes are
complex and powerful...But in many of the case studies reviewed in this
report, we found that the tools had such steep learning curves that their
actual utility in planning processes was limited, and while tools with different
functions and purposes are often interoperable this added yet another layer
of complexity (Smith & Snyder, 2011)."
• Which practices best offset unintended consequences of land use patterns?
o Given that a compact land use pattern minimizes land consumption and air
pollution on a regional level, how can planners best offset the increased local
emissions and water pollution caused by density? (A. L. Dannenberg, et al.,
2003)
• How do land use practices influence human behavior?
o What is the mechanism by which greening vacant land reduces gun violence?
Though the two are negatively correlated, it is not clear if the association is
due to removing a former weapon storage location for criminals, or if
improving the neighborhood aesthetic denormalizes criminal behavior
(frequently referred to as the broken windows theory), or due to another
explanation entirely.
139
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o The effects of the built environment on walking and cycling (rather than on
motorized modes of transportation, which have been studied significantly
more) (Robert Cervero & Duncan, 2003).
o How are people's travel behaviors affected by land-use patterns around the
work end of their commute trips, as opposed to around the home end?
Research on this topic would alleviate the uncertainty about the implications
of working in a TOD rather than living in one. However, it can be said that if
someone makes extra stops in between home and work that are not very
close to either their home or their work, the land-use patterns surrounding
those extra stops are unlikely to affect the mode choice for the overall tour (L.
Frank, et al., 2008a).
o What is the weight of these elements in determining the use of green space:
proximity, acreage, accessibility, quality, amenities, resources, perceived
neighborhood safety?
o Are physical environment measures or perceptions of the environment more
important to levels of physical activity? (A. L. Dannenberg, et al., 2003)
o Self-selection does not entirely explain the positive relationship between
park space availability and physical activity. "Future prospective and
intervention studies are needed to draw more definitive conclusions about
causality." (Kaczynski & Mowen, 2011).
• How do land use practices impact disadvantaged or underrepresented
populations?
o What are the differential effects of parks and greenspace on those who are
less fit or with health conditions, women, children, and seniors? Bowler et al
2010 notes in a meta-analysis of studies on the health effects of natural
environments that most studies were conducted on fit college-aged men
who volunteered.
o What are the effects of longer-term exposure to parks and the effects of
particular contexts (e.g. post-surgery or completing certain activities)?
Furthermore, outcomes that appear unaffected pre and post-test have been
shown to vary if measured during exposure, e.g. blood pressure drops during
exposure to natural environments, but does not persist afterwards (Bowler,
et al., 2010).
o What techniques support affordable housing in accessible locations? (C.
Dawkins, Schilling, & Alfonzo, 2011)
o How does place of residence impact the efficacy of routine healthcare?
(Corburn, 2013)
o Research to determine if and when agricultural conservation policies raise
property values sufficiently to displace low socio-economic residents (Poor &
Brule, 2007).
140
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o The accessibility of state and national parks may vary by groups, and in
particular be less accessible to low socioeconomic groups. One study found
that "my financial situation" was the second most commonly cited constraint
to visiting undeveloped natural areas (UNAs) (39%) after "my family and
friends do not visit UNAs" at 42% (Chavez, et al., 2008). More research may
be needed to identify the best strategies to provide travel accessibility of
natural areas to all groups,
o More research is necessary to examine how exposure is spatially determined.
This would be very valuable for city planners to making zoning and siting
decisions to minimize health effects from the high-risk industrial land uses,
o Does smart growth mainly benefit high SES individuals? (Dannenberg et a I,
2003)
o What benefits does the creation of urban green space provide in areas that
have poor environmental conditions or social problems? (James et al, 2009)
o How do the following processes contribute to and create environmental
inequalities among certain populations and communities: suburbanization,
land use planning, residential segregation, exclusionary zoning, banking
systems (mortgage guarantees), transportation policies, housing policies,
property speculation?
o What is the role of systemic economic inequalities, uneven regional
development in creating and or maintaining inequalities in environmental
health and distribution of environmental hazards and environmental quality?
o How are the benefits of urban forestry distributed across socioeconomic
divides (National Research Council, 2013)?
• How do land use policies and practices impact human well being :
o Evaluation of the effectiveness of mixed income housing projects in
improving resident well-being (L. M. Anderson, et al., 2003).
o Does having a mix of housing types ease the disadvantages of economic
inequality?
o How do single neighborhood characteristics influence mental health (rather
than neighborhood types encompassing panoply of characteristics)?
o More research is needed, however, on which strategies for dealing with
vacant lots provide the best outcomes within various contexts.
• How do land use policies and practices impact the market and the private sector?
o It would be beneficial to have more research on the effect of market
imperfections on roads. A market imperfection is anything that causes the
market price of a good or service to differ either from the cost of supplying it
or from the value placed on it by the customer. Market imperfections may
result either from government policies or from efforts by private-sector
141
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
actors to maximize their profits. For example, land use regulations produce
market imperfections by constraining the reaction of the real estate market
to the presence of a new, expanded, or altered roadway. Meanwhile, if an
inadequate or inefficient roadway system causes a given customer base to
only have easy access to one or a small number of businesses that provide a
given type of product or service, the business or businesses in question will
be able to exert a certain amount of monopoly- or oligopoly-type power,
allowing them to set the prices of their products and services higher than the
cost of providing them, which is another type of market imperfection (Hof, et
al., 2012).
o Not much research has yet been done on when the "announcement effect"
occurs. This is the phenomenon wherein the anticipation of benefits from a
new road or other piece of infrastructure causes nearby land prices to
increase prior to the beginning of construction (Tsutsumi & Seya, 2008).
o Past research has encountered difficulty in the task of separating out the
economic effects of road usage from those of other parts of the local
economy, such as labor and private capital. Furthermore, because different
modes of transportation (both road-based and non-road-based) relieve each
other's congestion effects, their economic impacts are difficult to separate
from one another (Kennedy, 2002).
o There is evidence that areas with smart growth controls in place may
generate more construction jobs, however few studies have corroborated
this.
o Do agricultural conservation policies raise property values sufficiently to
displace low socio-economic residents? (Poor & Brule, 2007)
8 Linkages for Land Use across Federal Agencies
EPA's primary inter-governmental effort on land use is through the Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) - Department of Transportation (DOT) - Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Partnership for Sustainable Communities (C. Dawkins, et al., 2011). The
Partnership for Sustainable Communities was developed in 2009 to help communities
improve access to affordable housing and transportation while protecting the environment.
The partnership works to coordinate federal housing, transportation, water, and other
infrastructure investments to make neighborhoods more prosperous, allow people to live
closer to jobs, save households' time and money, and reduce pollution. There are six
principles of livability that HUD, DOT and EPA incorporate into federal funding programs,
policies, and future legislative proposals:
• Provide more transportation choices: Develop safe, reliable, and economical
transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our
142
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
nation's dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, and promote public health.
• Promote equitable, affordable housing: Expand location- and energy-efficient
housing choices for people of all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities to increase
mobility and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation.
• Enhance economic competitiveness: Improve economic competitiveness through
reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities,
services and other basic needs by workers, as well as expanded business access to
markets.
• Support existing communities: Target federal funding toward existing
communities—through strategies like transit-oriented, mixed-use development and
land recycling—to increase community revitalization and the efficiency of public
works investments and safeguard rural landscapes.
• Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment: Align federal policies and
funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the
accountability and effectiveness of all levels of government to plan for future growth,
including making smart energy choices such as locally generated renewable energy.
• Value communities and neighborhoods: Enhance the unique characteristics of all
communities by investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods—rural,
urban, or suburban
"...by working together, these agencies can make sure that when it comes to development -
- housing, transportation, energy efficiency - these things aren't mutually exclusive; they go
hand in hand. And that means making sure that affordable housing exists in close proximity
to jobs and transportation. That means encouraging shorter travel times and lower travel
costs. It means safer, greener, more livable communities."
-- President Barack Obama, July 13, 2009
EPA has also partnered with other federal agencies to address specific areas of overlap in
the realm of land use and sustainability. For example:
EPA and FEMA partner to help communities prepare for and recover from natural disasters:
The two agencies will collaborate to help communities that have been hit by disasters to
rebuild in ways that protect the environment, create long-term economic prosperity, and
enhance neighborhoods. FEMA and EPA will also help communities incorporate into hazard
mitigation plans strategies that will improve quality of life and direct development away
from vulnerable areas, http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/fema_moa.htm
EPA and NOAA partner to help coastal communities: Under the agreement, the two
agencies will partner with local communities and other governmental entities to give
waterfront communities the tools and resources they need to grow in ways that benefit the
economy, public health, and the environment while protecting coastal ecosystems,
143
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
including anticipating and reducing the impacts of climate change.
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/noaamoa.html
9 Conclusions
Decisions regarding how land is used are among the most critical choices a community can
make that directly impact the quality of life. Land is needed to feed, to house, and to
provide resources that drive the economic development of society. While water and air are
transient, land is not.
The discourse on achieving sustainability for our society should be consistent with the goal
of well-being and quality of life for all members of the society while maintaining life
sustaining ecosystem goods and services. Land use has been shown to be critical to this end.
Changes in land use significantly impact the environment, the economy, and social
conditions. Furthermore, land use change is usually very long-lasting. Strides have been
made to reduce the detrimental and long lasting effects of land use change; however land
continues to be development and fragmented resulting in the reduction of the benefits and
degradation of its functionality. The question arises, which land use practices are
sustainable overtime?
An overriding theme which has emerged from this literature review is that for many
measures of sustainability, development form and pattern matter more than just
development intensity or density. For example, encouraging walking and bicycling and the
attendant benefits of these alternative transportation modes, small blocks and safe
neighborhoods are more important than density. Use of green infrastructure wherever
possible improves water quality, reduces wastewater treatment costs, and affects human
well being through a variety of processes. A dispersed land use pattern, as measured
through a sprawl index, by definition, cannot be sustained indefinitely due to the need for
constant infusion of new rural areas for development. The associated negative health and
environmental issues described above, which accompany sprawl, additionally detract from
the use of this development form.
Certainly some land use patterns do have minimum density thresholds to be effective. For
example, transit-oriented development requires a very minimum of 10 households per acre
for consistent bus service, and around 30 households per acre for rail. Certain land use
patterns also lend themselves to more or less density. However the literature is shifting
towards an understanding that associations with density are an imprecise proxy for land use
pattern, rather than the driving force.
Compact development is a key example of this principle. It can be measured in a variety of
ways and is typically considered a combination of various elements including density,
centralization, street connectivity, a mix of uses, and contiguous development. However it is
144
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
not merely density. Los Angeles, a very dispersed city, is also very dense. On the other hand,
many rural New England villages are compact, but still at rural densities. By a number of
measures, it is more sustainable than dispersed development. For example, compact
development preserves open space and agricultural land, promotes less driving and more
walking for transportation (which in turn improves air quality and human health), leads to
lower per capita GHG emissions, supports more social contact and other measures of social
capital, and leads to lower infrastructure capital and maintenance costs.
Nonetheless, our knowledge of the impact of various urban forms is still in its infancy. As
Alberti (2010) emphasizes, we do not yet know "how clustered versus dispersed and
monocentric versus polycentric urban structures differently affect ecological conditions. Nor
do we understand the ecological tradeoffs associated with different housing or alternative
infrastructures." The cutting edge of research now, therefore, is to define standard
methods for measuring land use patterns and teasing out their exact links to important
outcomes.
ORD is already in the process of developing valuable tools and research that can address
issues of quantification, forecasting, planning, tradeoffs, and collaborative decision making.
As you can see in table xxx, ORD has a substantial number of products addressing research
questions about the quantification of ecosystem goods and services, measuring
sustainability, comparing land use patterns, and providing user friendly decision support
tools.
In particular, ORD's Sustainable and Healthy Communities program is in the process of
developing and delivering very useful decision support tools. While best practices can
influence the direction of land use activities, decision support tools provide a solid
foundation for the social, environmental and economic considerations of multiple
approaches. ORD has invested heavily in advancing the field of ecosystem services
valuation, which has provided critical environmental information for development of new
decision support tools. Indeed, much of the strength of the Sustainable and Healthy
Communities program in contributing to land use research needs is in the area of decision
support tools. While ORD may not be focusing on individual facets of land use research, it
plays a vital role in compilation of such information and communication to
communities. For example, tools such as DASEES and C/T-FERST directly answer the call for
user friendly decision support tools that don't have steep data and expertise requirements
(Smith and Snyder, 2011).
Table 4 ORD Products and Research Needs
ORD Products and Research Needs
145
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
How do we best measure the impacts of land use choices?
Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Classification System (FEGS-CS). SHC Task 2.1.1.1
A Primer of Scaling Approaches and Analyses Useful in Ecosystem Management. SHC
Task 2.1.2.4.
Common sustainability metrics and are catalogued in a report that ranks the 50 most
populous cities in US based upon these metrics (SHC Task 2.2.1.1).
A database of sustainability indicators and indices (DOSII). 1.2.2.1.
The Report on the Environment. SHC Project 3.4.1.
What are the thresholds of land use characteristics to achieve sustainable outcomes?
No products identified
Identify ideal levels for land use indicators
No products identified
Quantify the impacts of land use decisions on the production of ecosystem goods and
services
A report titled Neighborhood Scale Quantification of Ecosystem Goods and Services. SHC
Task 2.1.4.1.
EnviroAtlas and the Urban Atlas. SHC Project 1.2.3
An Ecological Production Function Library. SHC Task 2.1.2.1.
Several peer-reviewed publications that quantify, value, and estimate the production of
ecosystem goods and services from Tampa Bay coastal areas. SHC Task 2.1.4.1.
A publication on the effects of urbanization on migrating birds on the western shore of
Lake Michigan. SHC Task ?
A peer reviewed report of selected ecosystem services provided by coastal wetlands of
the Laurentian Great Lakes. SHC Task 2.1.4.4.
Quantitatively compare alternative land use patterns
A dataset that shows the regional effects of climate change. ACE Task 155
An add-on tool to the USDA Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) Tool. ACE
A Site-Based Stormwater Calculator. SSWR Task 7.1A
Improve predictive accuracy of land use change modeling
No products identified
Decision support tools to predict how land use changes will affect growth and
development pattern
The Integrated Climate and Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS) Online. ACE Task 137
Provide user friendly decision support tools
DASEES (Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Environment, Economy, and Society). SHC
Task 1.1.1.2
The C(ommunity)-Focused Exposure and Risk Screening Tool (C-FERST) and Tribal-FERST.
SHCTask 2.2.1.5.
The Community Cumulative Assessment Tool (CCAT). SHC Task 2.2.3.5
Decision support tools to allow full cost and benefit accounting
146
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
A suite of decision support tools for communities that allow full value accounting. SHC
Task 1.2.1.3.
Which practices best offset unintended consequences of land use patterns?
A report on sparrow counts in Rhode Island. SHC Task 2.1.4.3
Guidance on municipal level best practices and a database on green infrastructure (Gl)
BMPs. SSWR 4.2.A.3 and SHC 1.1.1.3.
A green infrastructure planning framework. SSWR Task 4.1.A.1
How do land use policies and practices impact human well being? How do land use
practices impact disadvantaged or underrepresented populations?
A collection of 15 papers on disproportionate health risks. Task 2.2.3.5
How do land use practices influence human behavior?
No products identified
How do land use policies and practices impact the market and the private sector?
No products identified
10 Recommendations for EPA/ORD Science to Advance
Land Use Practices for Sustainability
However research needs remain that ORD can address. As you can see in table xxx, there
are several categories of land use sustainability needs that SHC is not yet addressing. Of
these, there are three categories in which EPA has particular expertise:
1. What are the thresholds of land use characteristics to achieve sustainable
outcomes?
2. Improve the predictive accuracy of land use change modeling
3. Provide decision support tools to allow full cost and benefit accounting
In addition, specific research needs identified in other categories provide opportunities for
future ORD research relevant to critical land use issues. Identified below are the primary
research needs identified through this review which EPA has the expertise to address, but
has not yet emphasized.
• What are the thresholds of land use characteristics to achieve sustainable
outcomes?
o What combination of density and compactness leads to the least overall
energy consumption? Studies like Holden and Norland, 2005 are lacking in
the U.S. context.
o What are the thresholds of preserved natural areas necessary to maintain
biotic integrity? Though this has been done for forests, it would be very
valuable to have analogous research conducted for other biomes.
147
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o More research to identify connectivity thresholds and document the benefits
of connectivity in an urban setting would be valuable (Ignatieva et al, 2011).
o How much intact urban forest is required to offset the impact of a given area
of impervious surface (National Research Council, 2013)?
• Quantify the impacts of land use decisions on the production of ecosystem goods
and services
o Does impervious surface cover increase in response to increased walkability
due to denser road network and wider streets to accommodate sidewalks?
o What, in relation to urban form, are the required quantity, quality and
configuration of urban green spaces to maintain, sustain and enhance
ecosystem services and ecological function compatible with other functions?
(James et a I, 2009)
o How can the provision and management of fresh- water quantity and quality
be promoted through urban green spaces? (James et al., 2009)
o Quantify urban forest benefits to the point at which they can meet
regulatory requirements for air and water pollution mitigation efforts
(National Research Council, 2013).
• Identify ideal levels for land use indicators
o Define ideal guidelines, analogous to ideal body weight, for land use mix,
walkability, proximity to greenspace, and more. (Dannenberg et a I, 2003)
o Improve predictive accuracy of land use change modeling
o Advancing LUC modeling is a critical land use research need. In order to be
able to quantitatively compare alternative land use patterns, it is critical to
be able to accurately model how intervention X changes land use.
• Quantitatively compare alternative land use patterns
o How do "clustered versus dispersed and monocentric versus polycentric
urban structures differently affect ecological conditions" (Alberti, 2010)?
o What is the magnitude of the tradeoff between elevated local emissions and
reduced regional emissions due to compact versus dispersed development,
and to what degree can it be mitigated through green infrastructure?
o Research to compare the per capita impervious surface loads of compact
versus dispersed regions,
o Research to understand the differential ecosystem-level effects of alternative
road networks (Coffin, 2007).
o Is residential clustering able to reduce exposure to pollutants such as
pesticides and other agricultural runoff?
• Decision support tools to allow full cost and benefit accounting
o Tools are needed which allow estimates of full costs and benefits for a
variety of land use options, such as parks, and allows benefits beyond
financial ones to be quantified. Economic considerations are often of
148
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
foremost importance to communities struggling with budget deficits,
unemployment, and inequality. In many cases, including green infrastructure,
mixed uses, and compact development, environmental sustainability is
complementary to economic sustainability. However tools are necessary to
allow communities to determine if this is the case for their circumstances,
o Decision support tools to predict how land use changes will affect growth
and development pattern
o Models are needed to understand and predict the "interactions between
road network structures and landscapes" (Coffin, 2007)
• Which practices best offset unintended consequences of land use patterns?
o Given that a compact land use pattern minimizes land consumption and air
pollution on a regional level, how can planners best offset the increased local
emissions and water pollution caused by density? (Dannenberg et al, 2003)
• How do land use practices impact disadvantaged or underrepresented
populations?
o What are the differential effects of parks and greenspace on less studied
populations, including those who are less fit or with health conditions,
women, children, and seniors?
o What are the effects of longer-term exposure to parks and the effects of
particular contexts (e.g. post-surgery or completing certain activities)?
o How does place of residence impact the efficacy of routine healthcare?
(Corburn, 2009)
o More research is necessary to examine how exposure is spatially determined.
This would be very valuable for city planners to making zoning and siting
decisions to minimize health effects from the high-risk industrial land uses,
o Does smart growth mainly benefit high SES individuals? (Dannenberg et a I,
2003)? While the principles of smart growth support equity, diversity, and
affordable housing, in practice, developments may inadvertently exclude the
poor. Smart growth or new urbanist style redevelopment may introduce
many positive changes, however it may also displace or exclude poorer
residents by increasing property values, failing to provide affordable housing,
or creating exclusionary privately owned 'public spaces' such as outdoor
malls and plazas.
o What benefits does the creation of urban green space provide in areas that
have poor environmental conditions or social problems? (James et al, 2009)
o How do the following processes contribute to and create environmental
inequalities among certain populations and communities: suburbanization,
land use planning, residential segregation, exclusionary zoning, banking
systems (mortgage guarantees), transportation policies, housing policies,
property speculation?
149
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
o What is the role of systemic economic inequalities, uneven regional
development in creating and or maintaining inequalities in environmental
health and distribution of environmental hazards and environmental quality?
o How are the benefits of urban forestry distributed across socioeconomic
divides (National Research Council, 2013)?
150
-------
Appendix A
Federal Authorities Relevant to Land Use
Federal agencies have a significant number of programs and authorities relevant to land use, land use planning, and decision making
at the community level. While a listing of all of the relevant programs would not be practical, we have compiled a list of the most
relevant laws and regulations in the table below. We list for which agencies they apply, and provide a short description of their
purpose.
Federal Authorities Relevant to Land Use
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
LAWS
National Environmental Policy Act of 1970-42 (JSC 4321 et seq.
All Federal agencies required to consider the environmental impact of
actions via an Environmental Impact Assessment. Public action and
explanations are required for each decision. In section 309 of the Clean
Air Act, EPA is required to review all environmental impact statements
from Federal agencies and refer unsatisfactory reviews to the Council
of Environmental Quality. EPA is responsible for the administrative
duties of the Environmental Impact Statement filing process.
REGULATIONS
40 CFR 1508.27 Requires all Federal agencies, except the Executive
Branch, to prepare environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements if necessary. The environmental impact statement
identifies the action and how it may impact the environment
("terrestrial,aquatic, subterranean, and aerial environments, such as
islands, cities, rivers or parts thereof")
30-50-60 Environmental impact statement requirement
Clean Air Act (CAA) 42 USC 7401 et seq (1970)
Amendments 1977, 1990
EPA regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. The law establishes ambient air quality standards for the Nation (National
Ambient Air Quality Standards) In addition, EPA regulates hazardous air pollutants (section 112)
Clean Water Act (CWA) 33 USC 1251 et seq (1972) - Significant expansion of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948. Regulates
discharge of pollutants into surface waters of the U.S.; Sets pollution, contaminant and wastewater standards for States and Industry
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 42 USC 300 et seq (1974)
Amendments 1996-EPA must consider risk and cost assessment. The amendment requires the best available Peer-reviewed science to be used
when setting the standards. In addition, the SDWA protects underground sources of drinking water.
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 42 USC 9601 etseq-Congress established the
"Superfund" as a source of monies dedicated to the cleanup of land that has been contaminated by hazardous spills, leaks and disasters by
A-l
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
unidentified parties. EPA enforces through penalties.
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986-Congress authorized EPA to continue CERCLA with site specific amendments,
additional monies, and enforcement; section III includes emergency planning and Community Right to Know amendment
Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002 (Brownfields Law)-amendments to CERCLA provide funds to assess and
cleanup Brownfields
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) 42 (JSC seq 1976-EPA authorized to monitor and ensure compliance of hazardous waste
from the site of contamination, to hazardous waste cleanup, to storage "cradle to grave"
Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Fair Housing Act o/1968-Prohibits discrimination in the sale rental and
financing of dwellings and in other house-related transactions based
on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status and
disability.
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 Title 42- Grantees
determine the type of community development projects that will be
funded instead of the Federal government.
The Public Health and Welfare chapter 69
Community development sec. 5318
Urban development sec. 5319
Community participation sec. 5319
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM)
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 USC Title 30,
chapter 25-The Agency is responsible for reclaiming abandoned mine
lands. Costs are attached to coal and removal and the monies are
placed into trust for clean-up purposes. The law establishes
environmental standards for mining companies. Title IV-fee collection
and distribution of monies in grants to states and tribes; Title V-
regulates coal mining on Federal lands
30 CFR -Mineral resources, Chapter VII (SMCRA) Parts 700-955
A-2
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
Federal Authorities Relevant to Land Use
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
LAWS
REGULATIONS
Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1994 (FPPA)- This act requires
Federal agencies to minimize the impact of programs which convert
farmland to nonagricultural use.
7 CFR 658 Farmland Protection
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Public Law 94-5791976-Guidelines for management, development,
protection and enhancement of Public lands
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 sec. 103 Title ll-The
law establishes the Bureau of Land Management. The BLM is
authorized to manage land use planning, land acquisition, disposition
and development. Title II specifies community development
regulations.
United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
Reclamation Act o/1902-Development of irrigation and hydropower
projects in 17 Western States
Town Sites and Power Development Act o/1906-authority to Secretary
of the Interior to lease surplus power or power privileges
Federal Water Power Act of 1920-regulated hydroelectric development
of navigable waterways
Reclamation Project Act 1939-extended the contract term to 40 years
for sale of power or lease of power privileges, gives preference to
public entities
Flood Control Act o/1944-authorized the Secretary of the Interior to
market power from Army Corps of Engineers projects
43 CFR Part 402-Sale of land in Federal Reclamation Projects
43 CFR Part 414-Offstream storage of Colorado River water and
development and release of Intentionally Created Unused
Apportionment in the lower Division States
43 CFR Part 422-Law enforcement authority at bureau of Reclamation
projects
43 CFR Part 420-Off-Road vehicle use
43 CFR Part 423,429-Public conduct on Bureau of Reclamation
Facilities, lands and water bodies
43 CFR Part 426-limits the acreage the Federal government can
reclaim; Rules and regulations
43 CFR Part 428-lnformation requirements for certain Farm operations
in excess of 900 acres and the eligibility of certain formerly excess land
A-3
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
EPA,BLM,HUD
Clean Water Act (CWA) 33 USC1251 etseq (1972) - Significant
expansion of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948.
Regulates discharge of pollutants into surface waters of the U.S.; Sets
pollution, contaminant and wastewater standards for States and
Industry
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 42 USC 300 et seq 1974 Amendments
1996-Risk and cost assessment required; The amendment requires the
best available Peer-reviewed science to be used when setting the
standards. The SDWA protects underground sources of drinking water.
Comprehensive Environmental Response compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980 42 USC 9601 et seq The "Superfund" is a source
of monies dedicated to the cleanup of land contaminated by
hazardous spills, leaks and disasters by unidentified parties. EPA is
authorized to enforce CERCLA through penalties.
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986
Congress authorized EPA to continue CERCLA with site specific
amendments, additional monies, and enforcement; section III includes
emergency planning and Community Right to Know amendment
Small business liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of
2002 (Brownfields Law) amendments to CERCLA provide funds to
assess and cleanup Brownfields
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of (RCRA) 42 USC seq 1976
EPA authorized to monitor and ensure compliance of hazardous waste
from the site of contamination, to hazardous waste cleanup, to storage
40 CFR Parts 150-189
A-4
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
"cradle to grave"
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Compliance Monitoring
(FIFRA) Act of 1972-Federal regulation of pesticide distribution, sale
and use; all pesticides required to be registered
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 sec. 103 Title II-
(FPPA) This act requires Federal agencies to minimize the impact of
programs which convert farmland to nonagricultural use.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 All Federal agencies
required to consider the environmental impact of actions via an
Environmental Impact Assessment. Public action and explanations are
required for each decision. In section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
required to review all environmental impact statements from Federal
agencies and refer unsatisfactory reviews to the Council of
Environmental Quality. EPA is responsible for the administrative duties
of the Environmental Impact Statement filing process.
40 CFR 1508.27 Requires all Federal agencies, except the Executive
Branch, to prepare environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements if necessary. The environmental impact statement
identifies the action and how it may impact the environment
("terrestrial,aquatic, subterranean, and aerial environments, such as
islands, cities, rivers or parts thereof")
30-50-60 Environmental impact statement requirement
EPA,BLM,USDA,USBR
Comprehensive Environmental Response compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980 42 (JSC 9601 et seq The "Superfund" is a source
of monies dedicated to the cleanup of land contaminated by
hazardous spills, leaks and disasters by unidentified parties. EPA is
authorized to enforce CERCLA through penalties.
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 sec. 103 Title II The
law establishes the Bureau of Land Management. The BLM is
authorized to manage land use planning, land acquisition, disposition
43 CFR Part 402-Sale of land in Federal Reclamation Projects
43 CFR Part 428-lnformation requirements for certain Farm operations
in excess of 900 acres and the eligibility of certain formerly excess land
A-5
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
and development. Title II specifies community development
regulations.
Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1994 (FPPA)
This act requires Federal agencies to minimize the impact of programs
which convert farmland to nonagricultural use.
Reclamation Act of 1902
Development of irrigation and hydropower projects in 17 Western
States
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 All Federal agencies
required to consider the environmental impact of actions via an
Environmental Impact Assessment. Public action and explanations are
required for each decision. In section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
required to review all environmental impact statements from Federal
agencies and refer unsatisfactory reviews to the Council of
Environmental Quality. EPA is responsible for the administrative duties
of the Environmental Impact Statement filing process.
40 CFR 1508.27 Requires all Federal agencies, except the Executive
Branch, to prepare environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements if necessary. The environmental impact statement
identifies the action and how it may impact the environment
("terrestrial,aquatic, subterranean, and aerial environments, such as
islands, cities, rivers or parts thereof")
30-50-60 Environmental impact statement requirement
EPA,USBR,OSM
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 USC Title 30,
chapter 25-The Agency is responsible for reclaiming abandoned mine
lands. Costs are attached to coal and removal and the monies are
placed into trust for clean-up purposes. The law establishes
environmental standards for mining companies. Title IV-fee collection
and distribution of monies in grants to states and tribes; Title V-
regulates coal mining on Federal lands
Clean Water Act (CWA) 33 USC 1251 etseq (1972) - Significant
expansion of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948.
Regulates discharge of pollutants into surface waters of the U.S.; Sets
pollution, contaminant and wastewater standards for States and
A-6
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
Industry
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 42 (JSC 300 et seq 1974 Amendments
1996-Risk and cost assessment required; The amendment requires the
best available Peer-reviewed science to be used when setting the
standards. The SDWA protects underground sources of drinking water.
Comprehensive Environmental Response compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980 42 (JSC 9601 et seq The "Superfund" is a source
of monies dedicated to the cleanup of land contaminated by
hazardous spills, leaks and disasters by unidentified parties. EPA is
authorized to enforce CERCLA through penalties
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986
Congress authorized EPA to continue CERCLA with site specific
amendments, additional monies, and enforcement; section III includes
emergency planning and Community Right to Know amendment
Reclamation Act of 1902
Development of irrigation and hydropower projects in 17 Western
States
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 All Federal agencies
required to consider the environmental impact of actions via an
Environmental Impact Assessment. Public action and explanations are
required for each decision. In section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
required to review all environmental impact statements from Federal
agencies and refer unsatisfactory reviews to the Council of
Environmental Quality. EPA is responsible for the administrative duties
of the Environmental Impact Statement filing process.
43 CFR Part 423,429-Public conduct on Bureau of Reclamation
Facilities, lands and water bodies
40 CFR 1508.27 Requires all Federal agencies, except the Executive
Branch, to prepare environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements if necessary. The environmental impact statement
identifies the action and how it may impact the environment
("terrestrial,aquatic, subterranean, and aerial environments, such as
islands, cities, rivers or parts thereof")
30-50-60 Environmental impact statement requirement
A-7
-------
SHC Land Use Planning SHC 4.1.2 Final Report September 2013
A-8
-------
Appendix B Tools to Support Decision Making
Tools to evaluate urban form:
• A workplace walkability audit tool has been developed to assess the walkability of
worksites, the first to expand walkability tools from the neighborhood to the
workplace (Dannenberg, Cramer, and Gibson, 2005). The validated tool can help
planners and facility managers identify and eliminate barriers to walking in the
workplace and improve employee health.
• The WalkScore methodology is used to assess neighborhood walkability based on
objective GIS indicators (primarily the number and variety of amenities within a %
mile); several studies have confirmed the validity of its estimates, at least at 1600m
scale (Duncan, 2011). Real estate agents have incorporated WalkScore into listings
and estimate that a 10-point increase in the WalkScore increases the value of a
property by 5-8% (Pivo, 2011). An important limitation to WalkScore is the inability
to measure other important drivers of walking including crime, pedestrian safety,
and attractiveness.
• Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) is a 98-question tool used to
assess perceived environmental attributes that influence physical activity. The NEWS
tool has been validated and determined to be generalizable to urban locations
across the United States. (Cerin et al, 2006)
• ParkScore, developed by The Trust for Public Land, ranks the 40 largest city parks
based on acreage (median park size and acreage as percentage of city area); service
& investment (spending-per-resident and playgrounds per-10,000-residents); plus
access (percentage of the population living within a ten minute walk of a public park)
(Harnik, Donahue, & Weiswerda, 2012; "Park Score Project,").
• Community Park Audit Tool (CPAT) assesses the potential of a park to promote
physical activity . The tool includes measures of accessibility, amenities, quality, and
safety (Kaczynski et al, 2012). The tool was developed and tested with community
stakeholders in order to ensure it was meaningful and applicable to a diverse group.
• Protocol for Assessing Community Excellence in Environmental Health (PACE EH) is
a tool to assess direct health consequences of community design decisions. The
purpose of the PACE EH tool is similar to that of health impact assessments.
• Models developed by the University of Connecticut use satellite based land cover
data to quantify changes in forest fragmentation, open space and urban growth
(Civco, et al., 2002).
Tools to plan development:
• Smart Location Database and Index. This index identifies sustainable locations for
new development by characterizing census block groups using five variables (i.e., the
5 Ds): density (population, housing, and jobs)s; diversity of land use; urban design;
B-l
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
destination accessibility, and distance to transit.
https://metrocouncil.onlinegroups.net/groups/research/files/f/26322-2012-02-
28T213936Z/SLD_v0 2_report.pdf
• Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Neighborhood Development
(LEED-ND) sets standards for sustainable best practices of communities and provides
certification to developments that meet those standards. It was developed in
partnership with the Congress for the New Urbanism and the Natural Resources
Defense Council. Elements of the built environment that limit the need for personal
vehicles and support alternative transportation are emphasized. Key parameters
include transportation options; a mix of uses; minimum impacts on the quality of air
and water; access to parks and open space, http://www.usgbc.org/neighborhoods
• Sustainable SITES Initiative (SSI) is a rating system and reference guide that
provides performance benchmarks for the design, construction, and maintenance of
sustainable sites. This venture certifies landscapes, with or without buildings, for
compliance with their benchmarks for sustainability. The US Green Building Council
and future iterations of LEED will incorporate elements of the SSI rating system to
expand the LEED concept to the landscape surrounding LEED buildings.
http://www.sustainablesites.org/
• Integrated Infrastructure Planning (IIP) is a planning approach that builds on smart
growth principles to pursue infrastructure investments that meet the needs of a
growing population while minimizing potential impacts of climate (Eastern Research
Group, 2011). Seattle is taking this approach with their Sustainable Infrastructure
Initiative. Financial support of multiple infrastructure needs is advocated for projects
that afford environmental and community benefits. The segregation of the
departmental planning processes, was noted as presenting a difficulty for
benchmarking current states, and measuring nonmonetary benefits.
• Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM) is designed to help communities
plan for sustainable water infrastructure through the use of decentralized solutions
such as rainwater tanks and local wastewater recycling (Burn, Maheeplala, and
Sharma, 2012; van Leeuwen et a I, 2012). This approach may be particularly effective
for sprawling areas where centralized water management systems are stretched to
the point of inefficiency.
• SmartCode is a transect-based tool supported by the Center for Applied Transect
Studies (CATS). The tool is an open code template designed for flexibility to create
zoning codes or ordinances to meet local conditions. Conversely the tool enables
developers to explore potential designs by removing many of the very detailed
restrictions, such as setback requirements, used in conventional zoning. SmartCode
tool is available free to communities online: http://www.transect.org/codes.html
• A model to support land use decision making by determining the best use of non-
urbanized areas has been developed in Italy (La Greca et al, 2011). It classifies land
B-2
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
based on the degree of evapotranspiration and fragmentation. While lands that are
highest in evapotranspiration and lowest in fragmentation are deemed most
appropriate for conservation, lands with evapotranspiration levels at the middle are
suggested for agricultural use. Those with the least fragmentation for larger
commercial applications, those most fragmented or smaller Community Supported
Agriculture farms or community gardens. The rubric may be particularly useful for
communities without established parameters and with land use plans that don't yet
differentiate between types of open space and agricultural uses.
• OpenTERRAworks (OTW) is an open access 2D/3D landscape design tool being
developed by the EPA Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program and
partners. The OTW supports comparative baseline and futures scenario modeling.
Users can visually display changes to land, soil, and hydrography, including cut and
fill operations, ditches, and bridges for simultaneous comparison with alternative
scenarios. Originally designed to facilitate planning for coal mining at the surface,
the tool has broad application to many land use modifications, such as for airport or
golf course sitings. While OTW can help modelers develop inputs for use at multiple
scales. After testing and quality assurance are completed, the tool will be openly
available to the public.
• The Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, supported by the Center for
Neighborhood Technology (CNT), enables users to calculate affordability of
metropolitan areas nationwide for combined costs of real estate and transportation
The index illustrates that the inclusion of transportation costs improves central
locations based on affordable.
• A methodology to disseminate and incorporate biodiversity and conservation data
into local smart growth plans has been developed by researchers at The Arizona
Game and Fish Department and Arizona State University. The method allows
planners to rapidly incorporate data into GIS models to prioritize potential areas for
development to minimize land use impact on biodiversity (Underwood et al, 2011).
Tools to evaluate impacts and tradeoffs:
• LUAIRTOX air toxics model assists land use planners by estimating toxic air
emissions given the industrial and commercially zoned land area, without the need
to detail specific facilities. It is an interactive spreadsheet model that applies a
published methodology to data from the California Air Toxics Inventory to generate
aggregate emission factors for industrially and commercially zoned districts. It is
designed to be a long-range planning tool to assess the community health risk
implications of alternative land use scenarios at a regional scale (Willis and Keller,
2007). The model enables distinctions between carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic
emissions to generate a spatially specific hazard index rating. The tool can help
planners predict the general pattern of risk from industrial emissions.
http://www2.bren.ucsb.edu/~mwillis/LUAIRTOX.htm
B-3
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Eco-Flow software package. This software facilitates analysis by-product synergy
(BPS) networks to find optimal by-product flows within a defined area. A case study
in Kansas City showed that industries working together could save up to $15 million
annually through coordinated actions (Cimren, Fiksel, Posner, & Sikdar, 2011).
• Industrial Ecosystem Toolkit. This tool quantifies the impact of collaborative
industrial networks designed to "reduce costs, employ assets more efficiently,
increase revenue, reduce risks, and conserve natural resources (Joseph Fiksel, Bakshi,
& leee, 2010)."
• A conservation priority ranking has been developed using the software Zonation
that balances the tradeoffs between carbon storage, biodiversity conservation,
agricultural value, and urban development potential (Moilanen et al, 2011). Though
the ranking was developed for the British context, the methodology could be applied
globally.
• Cellular automata based GIS modeling can be used to illustrate dynamic,
geographically specific iterative processes which allows modeling of more complex
processes than mathematical equations alone. This method has been applied to uses
such as urban spatial growth, forest fire spread, and land suitability analysis for
irrigated agriculture (Yu, Chen, and Wu, 2009).
• InVEST software tool has been used to help communities navigate ecosystem
service tradeoffs such as between agricultural productivity and water quality or
between financial return and carbon storage. A case study in Hawaii helped
Kamehameha Schools allocate their land in the best way to prioritize the ecosystem
services most important to the community including food security, climate change
mitigation, and diverse rural economic opportunities (Goldstein et a I, 2012).
• Envision Integrated Modeling Platform is a GIS-based framework to create
alternative future scenario applications. The tool consists of a dynamic spatial
engine and an open extensible architecture that allows any number of process
models, evaluative models, visualizers, and analysis modules. Together, the
framework allows simulation of land use change and documentation of resulting
effects on indices of ecosystem, social, and economic services.
http://envision.bioe.orst.edu/
• i-Tree Hydro allows the user to compare the effects of three scenarios- pre
developed, developed and green infrastructure - on a variety of outcomes including
surface runoff, infiltration, and pollutants. Through the online user interface, access
to data inputs will be facilitated, http://www.itreetools.org/hydro/. Two other
approaches exist to estimate the amenity value of street trees, CAVAT and Helliwell,
both of which may be useful to communities with limited data collection capacity
(Sarajevs, 2011).
• Coastal Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool (COAST). "The Coastal Adaptation to Sea
Level Rise Tool" (COAST) makes it possible to assesses costs and benefits of
B-4
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
adaptations to sea level rise scenarios by incorporating a variety of existing tools and
datasets into a comprehensive GIS-based picture of potential economic damage. The
tool utilizes local LIDAR data and tax assessments, and property values to predict
flood damage. Data output to Google Earth is enabled to visualize visualizes dollar
amounts for individual land parcels. This local, visual approach is highly engaging for
citizens, http://www.ebmtools.org/coastal-adaptation-sea-level-rise-tool-coast.html
Tools for collaborative planning:
• Healthy Development Measurement Tool (HDMT) was developed by the San
Francisco Department of Public Health to make HIA more user-friendly (Dannenberg
et al, 2011). The Sustainable Communities Index is a system of indicators to help
communities develop "livable, equitable and prosperous cities." This site provides
the methods and data sources required for collecting indicators for a particular city
or region and resources for applying these metrics to planning, policy making and
civic engagement. The tool provides a menu of more than 125 indicators, a checklist
of development targets, and a selection of strategies to meet those targets. Finally
evidence for the listed actions and impacts are provided. (Corburn, 2009, p200).
HDMT is now used in several cities across the country and has been adapted for use
in rural settings as well. An interactive web version of the tool is available online
http://www.sustainablecommunitiesindex.org/
• Frameworks to achieve sustainable agriculture are being developed by researchers
from England and Germany. The approach uses a systematic inventory to identify
pertinent issues and possible solutions to agricultural practices in transparent way
where the normative assumptions being made are clear, as opposed to many
scenario modeling efforts (Walter and Stutzel, 2009). This method is intended to
achieve greater stakeholder buy-in.
Informational resources
• Growing Smart legislative guidebook provides model statutes for planning and the
management of change is a continuously updated electronic book freely available
online. It details tools for state and local governments to help combat urban sprawl,
protect farmland, provide affordable housing, and encourage redevelopment. The
guidebook explains the process of planning statute reforms and provides detailed
model statutes for use as a resource for practicing planners and local governments.
http://www.planning.org/growingsmart/guidebook/
• NARC Roadmap to Green Infrastructure is a tool to assist local governments,
regional councils and their communities, to better understand how each federal
agency defines, implements and funds green infrastructure.
• Visualizing Density is an online photo essay put together by the Lincoln Institute of
Land Policy to visualize density measurements and the way design affects the
perception of density.
B-5
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
• Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments is a guide
developed by the EPA in conjunction with participants of a workshop on overcoming
barriers to green permitting. It provides a checklist to evaluate existing codes and
ordinances consistent with sustainable best practices (US Environmental Protection
Agency, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf
• Healthy Community Planning Toolbox, developed by the Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department, provides worksheets and resources to help integrate health into
planning documents in a way that fits a specific community context.
http://www.tpchd.org/environment/planning-healthy-communities/healthy-
community-planning-toolbox/
• Sustainability Best Practices Framework is a report published by the Institute for
Local Government: it highlights specific community policies that support energy
efficiency, clean water, green building, waste reduction, climate mitigation, efficient
transportation, sustainable land use, and more, http://www.ca-
ilg.org/sites/main/files/sustainability_best_practices_framework_7.0_versionjune_
2013_final_0.pdf
• Safe Routes to Schools is a national campaign of regional programs to promote
walking and biking to school. Public safety, planning offices, schools, and parents are
targeted to create safe streets and safe protocols for active travel to school.
http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/
• Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional, and State
Governments. This report outlines a process to identify local climate change risks, as
well as to gather support, to implement a climate mitigation and adaptation plan:
http://www.icleiusa.org/action-center/planning/adaptation-guidebook
Planning Philosophies and Organizations
• Smart Growth is a philosophy of urban planning and transportation designed to
combat sprawl by concentrating growth in compact, walkable urban centers. Smart
Growth advocates compact, transit-oriented land use that is walkable, bicycle
friendly and designed for safe, ready access to neighborhood schools. The concepts
of mixed-use development, and brownfield redevelopment with a range of housing
choices are fundamental concepts for Smart Growth. These actions support
preservation of open spaces and parkland, reduce the need for impervious surfaces,
and the protection of critical habitat and water quality. It emphasizes infill and
other strategies to limit green field development. The Smart Growth Network
(www.smartgrowth.org) is composed of the EPA and more than 40 nonprofit and
government organizations in support of ten smart growth principles.
• New Urbanism is a movement with many of the same tenants as smart growth that
emphasizes architecture and place making to a greater degree. The group's charter
advocates the following principles: "neighborhoods should be diverse in use and
population; communities should be designed for the pedestrian and transit as well
B-6
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
as the car; cities and towns should be shaped by physically defined and universally
accessible public spaces and community institutions; urban places should be framed
by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local history, climate, ecology,
and building practice." The Congress for the New Urbanism (www.cnu.org) has
partnered with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the US
Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Highway Administration, and the US
Green Building Council, among others to accomplish a variety of projects.
• Lifelong Communities (also called "aging in place). This approach emphasizes
community interventions which support safe, comfortable and independent living
regardless of age, income, or ability level. Their principles include improving
accessibility through transit, walkability, and compact design, improving services at
the neighborhood scale, increasing the variety of housing types and housing
affordability, and more. The goal is to foster communities where individuals can live
throughout the major transitions in their lives, as a student, young adult, parent,
retiree, and elder
• Placemaking is a philosophy that emphasizes the important role of public spaces
and walkable uses in creating vital communities that people find attractive and
welcoming. By highlighting unique community assets, advocates intend to create
spaces that support social capital and local prosperity. The movement critiques the
standardized form of typical suburban developments for creating spaces devoid of
character. The Project for Public Spaces (http://www.pps.org/) has developed a
guide to creating great federal public spaces for the US Department of Housing and
Urban Development (http://www.pps.org/projects/propertymanagersguide/).
• Just sustainability is parallel concept to environmental justice that emphasizes
intergenerational equity. Both share an affirmation of the potential for
environmental and land use decisions to disproportionately affect the poor and
minorities. Agyeman (2013) has described that "a truly just sustainable society is one
where wider questions of social needs, and welfare, and economic opportunity
B-7
-------
Appendix C ORD Tasks Listed in This Document
ID#
TASK
TASK LEAD
SHC
1.1.1.2
DASEES
Brian Dyson NRMRL/LRPCD
1.1.1.3
Perspective Analysis and systems framing
Marilynn Tenbrink,
NHEERL/AED
1.2.1.3
Suite of SHC tools that allow full value accounting
Allen Brookes NHEERL/WED
1.2.2.1
Inventory of Sustainability Indicators
Tarsha Eason NRMRL/STD
1.2.3
Creation of Foundational data necessary for
calculation of metrics for EnviroAtlas
Anne Neal NERL/ESD
2.1.1.1
Classification: defining and classifying ecosystem
services to link with human well-being and to avoid
double counting
Dixon Landers NHEERL/WED
2.1.2.1
Ecosystem Goods and Services Production Function
Library
Randall Bruins NERL/EERD
2.1.2.4
Uncertainty, scalability, and transferability of
ecosystem goods and services
Theodore Dewitt NHEERL/WED
2.1.4.1
Tampa Bay Ecosystem Services Demonstration Pilot
Marc Russell NHEERL/GED
2.1.4.3
Wetlands-Understanding the provisions of
Timothy Canfield
ecosystem services provided by wetlands and their
NRMRL/GWERD
use in sustainable land and water
2.1.4.4
Human Communities benefit from Great Lake
coastal ecosystems
David Bolgrien NHEERL/MED
2.2.1.1.
Public Health conditions: Data Integration to
improve Community Health Assessments
Timothy Wade NHEERL/EPHD
2.2.1.5
Development and application of community-based
Valerie Zartarian-Morrison
decision support tools
NERL/HEASD
2.2.1.6
Lessons learned, best practices and stakeholder
feedback from community and tribal participative
case studies
Florence Fulk NERL/EERD
2.2.3.5
Apply integrated transdisciplinary and community-
based participatory approaches to conduct
cumulative community assessments
Timothy Barzyk NERL/HEASD
3.1.2.1
Innovative approaches to support the measurement
and assessment of vapor intrusion into
Homes/Buildings from contaminated site
Brian Schumacher NERL/ESD
3.1.4.5
Research supporting L.U.S.T. Sites
James Weaver NRMRL/GWERD
3.1.5.1
Subsurface contaminant remediation
Richard Wilkin NRMRL/GWERD
3.3.1.2
Informing sustainable nitrogen decisions using an
ecosystem services framework
Jana Compton NHEERL/WED
3.4.1.1
Sustainability Indicators for the ROE
Patricia Murphy NCEA/IO
3.4.1.2
Annual update of ROE data sets
Patricia Murphy NCEA/IO
ACE
137
Integrated climate and land use tools data sets for
impacts, vulnerability and adaptation assessments
Britta Bierwagen NCEA/IO
C-l
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
155
Linkage with Global climate models: Downscaling
techniques
Tanya Otte NERL/AMAD
SSWR
4.1.A.1
Mitigation through multi-scale implementation of
green infrastructure in communities
William Shuster NRMRL/STD
4.2.A.
Place based and experimental monitoring of green
and grey infrastructure, best management practices
(BMP), and BMP treatment trains
Michelle Simon
NRMRL/WSWRD
7.1A
Highly Targeted Programmatic Support
C-2
-------
Appendix D Works Cited
Abel, T. D., & White, J. (2011). Skewed riskscapes and gentrified inequities: Environmental
exposure disparities in Seattle, Washington. Am. J. Public Health American Journal of Public
Health, 101(SUPPL. 1), S246-S254.
Abley, S. (2005). Walkability Scoping Paper. New Zealand.
Acevedo-Garcia, D., Osypuk, T. L., McArdle, N., & Williams, D. R. (2008). Toward a policy-
relevant analysis of geographic and racial/ethnic disparities in child health. Health Affairs,
27(2).
Active Living Research, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, & San Diego State University.
(2010). The economic benefits of open space, recreation facilities and walkable community
design. San Diego, Calif.: Active Living Research.
Adams, M. A., Ryan, S., Kerr, J., Sallis, J. F., Patrick, K., Frank, L. D., et al. (2009). Validation of
the Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) items using geographic
information systems. Journal of physical activity & health, 6 Suppl 1.
Adams, M. A., Sallis, J. F., Kerr, J., Conway, T. L., Saelens, B. E., Frank, L. D., et al. (2011).
Neighborhood environment profiles related to physical activity and weight status: A latent
profile analysis. Preventive Medicine, 52(5).
Agency, U. E. P. (1999). Industri-Plex Case Study. Retrieved Aug 27, 2013, from
http://www.epa.qov/superfund/proqrams/recycle/live/casestudy indplex.html
Agudelo-Vera, C. M., Leduc, W., Mels, A. R., & Rijnaarts, H. H. M. (2012). Harvesting urban
resources towards more resilient cities. [Article]. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 64,
3-12.
Agudelo-Vera, C. M., Mels, A. R., Keesman, K. J., & Rijnaarts, H. H. M. (2011). Resource
management as a key factor for sustainable urban planning. Journal of Environmental
Management, 92(10).
Ahmed, A. T., Mohammed, S. A., & Williams, D. R. (2007). Racial discrimination & health:
Pathways & evidence. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 126(A).
AKRF Inc. (2011). Impacts of Land Use on County Finances: A Fiscal Study of Queen Anne's
County, MD. Hanover, MD: Queen Anne's Conservation Association.
Alberti, M. (2005). The Effects of Urban Patterns on Ecosystem Function. International
Regional Science Review, 28(2), 168-192.
D-l
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Alberti, M. (2010). Maintaining ecological integrity and sustaining ecosystem function in
urban areas. [Review]. Current Opinion in EnvironmentalSustainability, 2(3), 178-184.
Alberti, M., Booth, D., Hill, K., Coburn, B., Avolio, C., Coe, S., et al. (2007). The impact of
urban patterns on aquatic ecosystems: An empirical analysis in Puget lowland sub-basins.
[Article]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 80(A), 345-361.
Almanza, E., Jerrett, M., Dunton, G., Seto, E., & Pentz, M. A. (2012). A study of community
design, greenness, and physical activity in children using satellite, GPS and accelerometer
data. [Article]. Health & Place, 18(1), 46-54.
American Farmland Trust. (2007). Farming On the Edge Report: Sprawling Development
Threatens America's Best Farmland.
American Planning Association. (1999). Planning communities for the 21st century.
Washinton D.C.: APA.
American Planning Association. (2012). Planning in America: Perceptions and Priorities 2012:
American Planning Association.
Anderson, C. A. (2001). Heat and Violence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(1),
33-38.
Anderson, G. S., & Danielson, B. J. (1997). The effects of landscape composition and
physiognomy on metapopulation size: the role of corridors. Landscape Ecology, 12(5).
Anderson, L. M., St Charles, J., Fullilove, M. T., Scrimshaw, S. C., Fielding, J. E., Normand, J.,
et al. (2003). Providing affordable family housing and reducing residential segregation by
income - A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 24(3).
Anderson, S. T., & West, S. E. (2006). Open space, residential property values, and spatial
context. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36(6), 773-789.
Arkema, K. K., Guannel, G., Verutes, G., Wood, S. A., Guerry, A., Ruckelshaus, M., et al.
(2013). Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms. Nature
Climate Change, In press.
Arnold, C. L. G. C. J. (1996). Impervious Surface Coverage: The Emergence of a Key
Environmental Indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association Journal of the
American Planning Association, 62(2), 243-258.
Ayres, W. S., & McCalla, A. F. (1996). Rural development, agriculture, and food security.
Finance & development.
Azqueta, D., & Sotelsek, D. (2007). Valuing nature: From environmental impacts to natural
capital. Ecological Economics, 63(1).
D-2
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Baldauf, R. W., Cahill, T. A., Bailey, C. R., Khlystov, A., Zhang, K. M., Cook, J. R., et al. (2009,
August). Can roadway design be used to mitigate air quality impacts from traffic?
Environmental Manager (EM).
Baranowski, T., Thompson, W. 0., Durant, R. H., Baranowski, J., & Puhl, J. (1993).
Observations on Physical Activity in Physical Locations: Ager Gender, Ethnicity, and Month
Effects, [research-article]. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 64(2), 127-133.
Barbier, E. B., Georgiou, I. Y., Enchelmeyer, B., & Reed, D. J. (2013). The Value of Wetlands
in Protecting Southeast Louisiana from Hurricane Storm Surges. PLOS ONE, 8(3).
Baron, S., Sinclair, R., Payne-Sturges, D., Phelps, J., Zenick, H., Collman, G. W., et al. (2009).
Partnerships for environmental and occupational justice: contributions to research, capacity
and public health. American journal of public health, 99 Suppl 3.
Barron, D. J. (2002-2003). Reclaiming Home Rule. Harvard Law Review, 116, 2257.
Bastin, L., & Thomas, C. D. (1999). The distribution of plant species in urban vegetation
fragments. Landscape Ecology, 14(5).
Baumgardner, D., Varela, S., Escobedo, F. J., Chacalo, A., & Ochoa, C. (2012). The role of a
peri-urban forest on air quality improvement in the Mexico City megalopolis. Environmental
Pollution, 163.
Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J., & Cohen, D. A. (2005). The significance of parks to
physical activity and public health: A conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 28(2), 159-168.
Beier, P., & Noss, R. F. (1998). Do habitat corridors provide connectivity? Conservation
Biology, 12(6).
Bell, J. F., Wilson, J. S., & Liu, G. C. (2008). Neighborhood Greenness and 2-Year Changes in
Body Mass Index of Children and Youth. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(6),
547-553.
Benedict, M. A., & McMahon, E. (2006). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and
Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Bennett, A. B., & Gratton, C. (2012). Local and landscape scale variables impact parasitoid
assemblages across an urbanization gradient. [Article]. Landscape and Urban Planning,
104(1), 26-33.
Bennett, R., Tambuwala, N., Rajabifard, A., Wallace, J., & Williamson, I. (2013). On
recognizing land administration as critical, public good infrastructure. Land Use Policy, 30(1),
84-93.
D-3
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Berke, E. M., Gottlieb, L. M., Moudon, A. V., & Larson, E. B. (2007). Protective Association
Between Neighborhood Walkability and Depression in Older Men. Journal of the American
Geriatrics Society, 55(4), 526-533.
Berke, P. R., Macdonald, J., White, N., Holmes, M., Line, D., Oury, K., et al. (2003). Greening
Development to Protect Watersheds: Does New Urbanism Make a Difference? [research-
article]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(A), 397-413.
Besser, L. M., Marcus, M., & Frumkin, H. (2008a). Commute time and social capital in the US.
[Article]. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(3), 207-211.
Besser, L. M., Marcus, M., & Frumkin, H. (2008b). Commute time and social capital in the US.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(3).
Bettencourt, L., Lobo, J., Helbing, D., Kuhnert, C., & West, G. (2007). Growth, innovation,
scaling, and the pace of life in cities. Proceedings of the national academy of Sciences,
104(17), 7301-7306.
Bettencourt, L. M. A., & West, G. B. (2011). Bigger Cities Do More with Less New science
reveals why cities become more productive and efficient as they grow. Scientific American,
305(3).
Bhatia, R., & Wier, M. (2011). "Safety in Numbers" re-examined: Can we make valid or
practical inferences from available evidence? [Review]. Accident; analysis and prevention,
43(1), 235-240.
Black, J. T. (1996). The Economics of Sprawl. Urban Land, March, 52-53.
Blaha, K. (2005). How Cities Use Parks for Smart Growth: The City Parks Forum is a program
of the American Planning
Association funded by the Wallace-Reader's Digest Funds
and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.
Blair, R. B. (1996). Land Use and Avian Species Diversity Along an Urban Gradient. Ecological
Applications, 6(2), 506-519.
Blann, K. L., Anderson, J. L., Sands, G. R., & Vondracek, B. (2009). Effects of Agricultural
Drainage on Aquatic Ecosystems: A Review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and
Technology, 39(11), 909-1001.
BOC. (1991). American Housing Survey for the United States in 1991.
BOC. (2009). American Housing Survey for the United States in 2009.
BOC. (2011). Average population per household and family: 1940-present.
D-4
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Bogunovich, D. (2009). From planning sustainable cities to designing resilient urban regions.
[Proceedings Paper]. Sustainable Development and Planning Iv, Vols 1 and 2, 120, 87-96.
Bolund, P., & Hunhammar, S. (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological
Economics, 29(2), 293-301.
Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and People: An
Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland, [research-article]. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers, 99(A), 767-787.
Boruff, B. J., Emrich, C., & Cutter, S. L. (2005). Erosion hazard vulnerability of US coastal
counties. Journal of Coastal Research, 21(5).
Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L. M., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010). A systematic review of
evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments. Bmc Public
Health, 10.
Brabec, E. A. (2009). Imperviousness and land-use policy: Toward an effective approach to
watershed planning. [Review]. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 14(A), 425-433.
Bramley, G., Dempsey, N., Power, S., Brown, C., & Watkins, D. (2009). Social sustainability
and urban form: evidence from five British cities. Environment & planning. A., 41(9), 2125-
2142.
Branas, C. C., Cheney, R. A., MacDonald, J. M., Tam, V. W., Jackson, T. D., & Ten Have, T. R.
(2011). A Difference-in-Differences Analysis of Health, Safety, and Greening Vacant Urban
Space. American Journal of Epidemiology, 174(11), 1296-1306.
Bratkovich, S. (2001). Utilizing municipal trees : ideas from across the country. St. Paul, MN:
USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry.
Brattebo, B. O., & Booth, D. B. (2003). Long-term stormwater quantity and quality
performance of permeable pavement systems. Water Research, 37(18).
Brender, J. D., Maantay, J. A., & Chakraborty, J. (2011). Residential Proximity to
Environmental Hazards and Adverse Health Outcomes. American Journal of Public Health,
101.
Brender, J. D., Zhan, F. B., Suarez, L., Langlois, P., Gilani, Z., Delima, I., et al. (2006). Linking
environmental hazards and birth defects data. International Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Health, 12(2).
Brender, J. D., Zhan, F. B., Suarez, L., Langlois, P. H., & Moody, K. (2006). Maternal
residential proximity to waste sites and industrial facilities and oral clefts in offspring.
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 48(6).
Brennan, M. (2013). The World's Most Expensive Cities For Luxury Real Estate. Forbes.
D-5
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Brown, B. B., Yamada, I., Smith, K. R., Zick, C. D., Kowaleski-Jones, L., & Fan, J. X. (2009).
Mixed land use and walkability: Variations in land use measures and relationships with BMI,
overweight, and obesity. Health & Place, 15(4), 1130-1141.
Bryan, B. A., Grandgirard, A., & Ward, J. R. (2009). Quantifying strategic regional priorities
for managing natural capital: Compositional exploration of MCA-derived weights.
Bullard, R., G. Johnson, and A. Torres. (2000). Sprawl city: Race, politics and planning in
Atlanta. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Burchell, R., Shad, N., Litokin, D., Phillips, H., Downs, A., Seskin, S., et al. (1998). The costs of
sprawl revisited. TCRP report no. 39. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Burchell, R. W. (2002). Costs of sprawl-2000. Retrieved from
http://onlinepubs.trb.orq/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp rpt 74-a.pdf.
Burchell, R. W., & Mukherji, S. (2003). Conventional development versus managed growth:
the costs of sprawl. Am J Public Health, 93(9), 1534-1540.
Burchfield, M., Overman, H. G., Puga, D., & Turner, M. A. (2006). Causes of sprawl: A
portrait from space. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 587-633.
Burden, D. (2006). 22 Benefits of Urban Street Trees: Glatting Jackson and Walkable
Communities, Inc.
Burton, E. (2000). The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis. Urban
Studies, 37(11), 1969-2006.
Buscaino, M., Upchurch, M., Whitlow, H., & Wellborn, B. (2008). Tree, Space, Design:
Growing the Tree Out of the Box. Washington, DC: Casey Trees.
Calfapietra, C., Fares, S., Manes, F., Morani, A., Sgrigna, G., & Loreto, F. (2013). Role of
Biogenic Volatile Organic Compounds (BVOC) emitted by urban trees on ozone
concentration in cities: A review. Environmental Pollution(0).
California Energy Commission. (2005). Biomass in California : challenges, opportunities, and
potentials for sustainable management and development PIER collaborative report.
[Sacramento, Calif.]: California Energy Commission.
California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. (2010). Strategies for sustainable
communities: A guidebook based on California community types. Sacramento, CA:
Governor's Office of Planning and Research.
Campbell, L. K., Wiesen, A., United States. Forest, S., United States. Forest Service. Northern
Research, S., & Meristem. (2009). Restorative commons creating health and well-being
through urban landscapes. Newtown Square, PA; New York, N.Y.: USDA Forest Service,
Northern Research Station ; Meristem.
D-6
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2007). Do changes in neighborhood characteristics
lead to changes in travel behavior ? A structural equations modeling approach.
Transportation, 34(5).
Cao, X. Y., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2006). Neighborhood design and vehicle type
choice: Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D-Transport and
Environment, 11(2).
Carlson, C., Aytur, S., Gardner, K., & Rogers, S. (2012). Complexity in Built Environment,
Health, and Destination Walking: A Neighborhood-Scale Analysis. Journal of Urban Health,
89(2), 270-284.
Carnoske, C., Hoehner, C., Ruthmann, N., Frank, L., Handy, S., Hill, J., et al. (2010). Developer
and realtor perspectives on factors that influence development, sale, and perceived
demand for activity-friendly communities. Journal of physical activity & health, 7 Suppl 1.
Carroll, C., McRae, B. H., & Brookes, A. (2012). Use of Linkage Mapping and Centrality
Analysis Across Habitat Gradients to Conserve Connectivity of Gray Wolf Populations in
Western North America. Conservation Biology, 26(1), 78-87.
Carruthers, J. I., & Vias, A. C. (2005). Urban, suburban, and exurban sprawl in the Rocky
Mountain West: Evidence from regional adjustment models. [Article]. Journal of Regional
Science, 45(1), 21-48.
Casagrande, S. S., Gittelsohn, J., Zonderman, A. B., Evans, M. K., & Gary-Webb, T. L. (2011).
Association of Walkability With Obesity in Baltimore City, Maryland. American Journal of
Public Health, 101.
Casey Trees. (2013). Casey Trees: Mission and History, from http://caseytrees.orq/
Cavanagh, J.-A. E., Zawar-Reza, P., & Wilson, J. G. (2009). Spatial attenuation of ambient
particulate matter air pollution within an urbanised native forest patch. Urban Forestry &
Urban Greening, 8(1), 21-30.
Center for Neighborhood, T. (2012). Prospering in Place : Linking jobs, development, and
transit to spur Chicago's economy. [Chicago]: Center for Neighborhood Technology.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics
(WISQARS). Retrieved March 22, 2013, from http://www.cdc.qov/iniury/wisqars/index.html
Cervero, R. (2001). Efficient Urbanisation: Economic Performance and the Shape of the
Metropolis. Urban Studies, 38(10), 1651-1671.
Cervero, R., & Bosselmann, P. (1994). An evaluation of the market potential for transit-
oriented development using visual simulation techniques. Berkeley: University of California
at Berkeley, Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
D-7
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Cervero, R., & Duncan, M. (2003). Walking, bicycling, and urban landscapes: Evidence from
the San Francisco bay area. [Abstract]. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1478-1483.
Cervero, R., Duncan, M., & Trb, T. R. B. (2002). Transit's value-added effects - Light and
commuter rail services and commercial land values. Travel Demand and Land Use 2002:
Planning and Administration(1805).
Chakraborty, J., Maantay, J. A., & Brender, J. D. (2011). Disproportionate Proximity to
Environmental Health Hazards: Methods, Models, and Measurement. American Journal of
Public Health, 101.
Chang, H. C., H.C. Planning Consultants, I., & Planimetries, L. L. P. (1999). The costs of
suburban sprawl and urban decay in Rhode Island. Providence, Rl: Grow Smart Rhode Island.
Chatman, D. G. (2008). Deconstructing development density: Quality, quantity and price
effects on household non-work travel. Transportation Research Part a-Policy and Practice,
42(7).
Chavez, D. J., Winter, P. L., & Absher, J. D. (2008). Recreation visitor research: studies of
diversity. Retrieved from
http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw qtr2io/psw qtr2io.pdf.
Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Kline, P., & Saez, E. (2013). The Equality of Opportunity Project.
Retrieved Sept 28, 2013, from http://www.equality-of-opportunity.orq
Cho, S.-H., Poudyal, N. C., & Roberts, R. K. (2008). Spatial analysis of the amenity value of
green open space. Ecological Economics, 66(2-3), 403-416.
Christian, H. E., Bull, F. C., Middleton, N. J., Knuiman, M. W., Divitini, M. L., Hooper, P., et al.
(2011). How important is the land use mix measure in understanding walking behaviour?
Results from the RESIDE study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical
Activity, 8.
Christian, T. J. (2012a). Automobile commuting duration and the quantity of time spent with
spouse, children, and friends. [Article]. Preventive Medicine, 55(3), 215-218.
Christian, T. J. (2012b). Trade-offs between commuting time and health-related activities.
[Article]. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 89(5),
746-757.
Cimren, E., Fiksel, J., Posner, M. E., & Sikdar, K. (2011). Material Flow Optimization in By-
product Synergy Networks. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 15(2).
City of Olympia, P. W. D., Water Resources Program. (1995). Impervious Surface Reduction
Study: Final Report. Olympia, WA.
D-8
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Civco, D. L., Hurd, J. D., Wilson, E. H., Arnold, C. L., & Prisloe, M. P. (2002). Quantifying and
describing urbanizing landscapes in the Northeast United States. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing, 68(10).
Coaffee, J., Moore, C., Fletcher, D., & Bosher, L. (2008). Resilient design for community
safety and terror-resistant cities. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal
Engineer, 161(2).
Coffin, A. (2007). From roadkill to road ecology: A review of the ecological effects of roads.
Journal of Transport Geography, 15(5), 396-406.
Cohen, D. A., McKenzie, T. L., Sehgal, A., Williamson, S., Golinelli, D., & Lurie, N. (2007).
Contribution of Public Parks to Physical Activity, [research-article]. American Journal of
Public Health, 97(3), 509-514.
Colford, J. M., Jr., Schiff, K. C., Griffith, J. F., Yau, V., Arnold, B. F., Wright, C. C., et al. (2012).
Using rapid indicators for Enterococcus to assess the risk of illness after exposure to urban
runoff contaminated marine water. Water Research, 46(7).
Conway, T. M., & Lathrop, R. G. (2005). Alternative land use regulations and environmental
impacts: assessing future land use in an urbanizing watershed. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 71(1).
Corburn, J. (2013). Toward the healthy city: People, places, and the politics of urban
planning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Coutts, C. (2009). Multiple Case Studies of the Influence of Land-Use Type on the
Distribution of Uses along Urban River Greenways. Journal of Urban Planning and
Development-Asce, 135(1).
Crompton, J. L. (2001). The Impact of Parks on Property Values: A Review of the Empirical
Evidence. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(1), 1-31.
Crossman, N. D., Bryan, B. A., & King, D. (2009). Integration of landscape-scale and site-scale
metrics for prioritising investments in natural capital.
Cutsinger, J., & Galster, G. (2006). There is No Sprawl Syndrome: A New Typology of
Metropolitan Land Use Patterns. Urban Geography, 27(3), 228-252.
Cutts, B. B., Darby, K. J., Boone, C. G., & Brewis, A. (2009). City structure, obesity, and
environmental justice: an integrated analysis of physical and social barriers to walkable
streets and park access. Social science & medicine (1982), 69(9).
Dalbey, M. (2008). Implementing smart growth strategies in rural America: development
patterns that support public health goals. Journal of public health management and
practice :JPHMP, 14(3).
D-9
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Dallmann, T. R., & Harley, R. A. (2010). Evaluation of mobile source emission trends in the
United States. [Article]. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 115.
Danielsen, K. A., Lang, R. E., & Fulton, W. (1999). Retracting suburbia: Smart growth and the
future of housing, [other]. Housing Policy Debate, 10(3), 513-540.
Dannenberg, A. L., Frumkin, H., & Jackson, R. J. (2011). Making healthy places:
Designing and building for health, well-being, and sustainability. Washington: Island Press.
Dannenberg, A. L., Jackson, R. J., Frumkin, H., Schieber, R. A., Pratt, M., Kochtitzky, C., et al.
(2003). The impact of community design and land-use choices on public health: A scientific
research agenda. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9).
Dark, T., Williams, C. R., & Barnett, E. (2004). Racial disparities in stroke mortality and
residential segregation. Circulation, 109(7).
David, G. C. L., Bledsoe, B. P., Merritt, D. M., & Wohl, E. (2009). The impacts of ski slope
development on stream channel morphology in the White River National Forest, Colorado,
USA. Geomorphology, 103(3).
Davies, H., & Kamp, I. V. (2012). Noise and cardiovascular disease: A review of the literature
2008-2011. [Review], Noise & Health, 14(61), 287-291.
Dawkins, C., Schilling, J., & Alfonzo, M. (2011). Policy Research Priorities for Sustainable
Communities: Insights and Ideas for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development
and the Federal Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities.
Dawkins, C. J., & Nelson, A. C. (2002). Urban containment policies and housing prices: an
international comparison with implications for future research. Land Use Policy, 19(1), 1-12.
Day, R. (2008). Local environments and older people's health: Dimensions from a
comparative qualitative study in Scotland. Health & Place, 14(2), 299-312.
de Nazelle, A., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Anto, J. M., Brauer, M., Briggs, D., Braun-Fahrlander,
C., et al. (2011). Improving health through policies that promote active travel: A review of
evidence to support integrated health impact assessment. Environment International, 37(4).
De Sousa, C., D'Sousa, L-A. (2013). Atlantic Station, Atlanta, Georgia: A Sustainable
Brownfield Revitalization Best Practice. University of Illinois at Chicago: University of Illinois
At Chicago Institute for Environmental Science and Policy.
Deal, B., & Schunk, D. (2004). Spatial dynamic modeling and urban land use transformation:
a simulation approach to assessing the costs of urban sprawl. Ecological Economics,
51(lssues 1-2), 79-95.
D-10
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Decker, K. L., Allen, C. R., Acosta, L., Hellman, M. L., Jorgensen, C. F., Stutzman, R. J., et al.
(2012). Land Use, Landscapes, and Biological Invasions. [Article]. Invasive Plant Science and
Management, 5(1), 108-116.
Dickens, A. P., Richards, S. H., Greaves, C. J., & Campbell, J. L. (2011). Interventions targeting
social isolation in older people: A systematic review. [Review]. BMC Public Health, 11.
DiNapoli, T. P. (2010). Economic benefits of open space preservation. Retrieved from
http://www.osc.state.nv.us/reports/environmental/openspacepreservio.pdf.
Dolan, R. W., Moore, M. E., & Stephens, J. D. (2011). Documenting effects of urbanization
on flora using herbarium records. [Article]. Journal of Ecology, 99(A), 1055-1062.
Donham, K. J., Wing, S., Osterberg, D., Flora, J. L., Hodne, C., Thu, K. M., et al. (2007).
Community Health and Socioeconomic Issues Surrounding Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operations. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(2), 317-320.
Doyle, S., Kelly-Schwartz, A., Schlossberg, M., & Stockard, J. (2006). Active Community
Environments and Health: The Relationship of Walkable and Safe Communities to Individual
Health, [research-article]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(1), 19-31.
Dravigne, A., Waliczek, T. M., Lineberger, R., & Zajicek, J. (2008). The effect of live plants and
window views of green spaces on employee perceptions of job satisfaction. HortScience,
43(1), 183-187.
Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., & Speck, J. (2000). Suburban nation : the rise of sprawl and the
decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point Press.
Duncan, M. J., Winkler, E., Sugiyama, T., Cerin, E., duToit, L., Leslie, E., et al. (2010).
Relationships of Land Use Mix with Walking for Transport: Do Land Uses and Geographical
Scale Matter? Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 87(5).
Duryea, M. L., Kampf Binelli, E., & Korhnak, L. V. (2000). Restoring the urban forest
ecosystem.
EIA. (2012). Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS).
Eigenbrod, F., Bell, V. A., Davies, H. N., Heinemeyer, A., Armsworth, P. R., & Gaston, K. J.
(2011). The impact of projected increases in urbanization on ecosystem services. [Article].
Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 278(1122), 3201-3208.
Emrath, P. (2006). NAHB: Residential Land Use in the U.S. Housing Economics, (Special
Studies). Retrieved from http://www.nahb.orq/qeneric.aspx?qenericContentlD=678^2
Emrich, C. T., & Cutter, S. L. (2011). Social Vulnerability to Climate-Sensitive Hazards in the
Southern United States. Weather Climate and Society, 3(3).
D-ll
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact
Development (LID) Strategies and Practices. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
Environmental Protection Agency: Office of Atmospheric, P., & Environmental Protection
Agency: Climate Protection Partnership, D. (2008). Reducing Urban Heat Islands:
Compendium of Strategies - Trees and Vegetation. Reducing Urban Heat Islands:
Compendium of Strategies, from
http://www.epa.qov/hiri/resources/pdf/TreesandVeqCompendium.pdf
ERS, U. (2006). U.S. Textile and Apparel Industries and Rural America.
ERS, U. (2009). Baby Boom Migration and Its Impact on Rural America.
ERS, U. (2010). Nonmetropolitan Outmigration Counties: Some Are Poor, Many Are
Prosperous.
ERS, U. (2011a). Major Uses of Land in the United States, 2007.
ERS, U. (2011b). Rural America At A Glance.
ERS, U. (2012a). Macroeconomics and Agriculture.
ERS, U. (2012b). Trends in U.S. Farmland Values and Ownership.
Escobedo, F., Varela, S., Zhao, M., Wagner, J. E., & Zipperer, W. (2010). Analyzing the
efficacy of subtropical urban forests in offsetting carbon emissions from cities.
Environmental Science & Policy, 13(5), 362-372.
Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. (2011). Urban forests and pollution mitigation:
Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. [Article; Proceedings Paper]. Environmental
Pollution, 159(8-9), 2078-2087.
Escobedo, F. J., & Nowak, D. J. (2009). Spatial heterogeneity and air pollution removal by an
urban forest. Landscape and Urban Planning, 90(3-4), 102-110.
Escobedo, F. J., Wagner, J. E., Nowak, D. J., De la Maza, C. L., Rodriguez, M., & Crane, D. E.
(2008). Analyzing the cost effectiveness of Santiago, Chile's policy of using urban forests to
improve air quality. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(1), 148-157.
Evans, G. W., Wells, N. M., & Moch, A. (2003). Housing and Mental Health: A Review of the
Evidence and a Methodological and Conceptual Critique. Journal of Social Issues, 59(3), 475-
500.
Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010a). Travel and the built environment. [Article]. Journal of the
American Planning Association, 76(3), 265-294.
D-12
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010b). Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. Journal
of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 264-294.
Ewing, R., Cervero, R., & Trb. (2001). Travel and the built environment - A synthesis. [Article;
Proceedings Paper]. Land Development and Public Involvement in Transportation: Planning
and Administration(1780), 87-114.
Ewing, R., Greenwald, M., Zhang, M., Walters, J., Feldman, M., Cervero, R., et al. (2011).
Traffic Generated by Mixed-Use Developments-Six-Region Study Using Consistent Built
Environmental Measures. Journal of Urban Planning and Development-Asce, 137(3).
Ewing, R., Pendall, R., & Chen, D. (2003a). Measuring Sprawl and It's Impact. Washington,
DC: Smart Growth America.
Ewing, R., Pendall, R., Chen, D., Trb, & Trb, T. R. B. (2003). Measuring sprawl and its
transportation impacts. Travel Demand and Land Use 2003: Planning and
Administration(1831).
Ewing, R., Schieber, R. A., & Zegeer, C. V. (2003). Urban sprawl as a risk factor in motor
vehicle occupant and pedestrian fatalities. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9).
Ewing, R., Schmid, T., Killingsworth, R., Zlot, A., & Raudenbush, S. (2003). Relationship
between urban sprawl and physical activity, obesity, and morbidity. American journal of
health promotion : AJHP, 18(1).
Ewing, R. H. (2008). Characteristics, causes, and effects of sprawl: A literature review. In J. M.
Marzluff, E. Shulenberger, W. Endlicher, M. Alberti, G. Bradley, C. Ryan, U. Simon & C.
ZumBrunnen (Eds.), Urban Ecology (pp. 519-535): Springer US.
Eyler, A., Matson-Koffman, D., Young, D., Wilcox, S., Wilbur, J., Thompson, J., et al. (2003).
Quantitative study of correlates of physical activity in women from diverse racial/ethnic
groups: The Women's Cardiovascular Health Network Project summary and conclusions.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 25(3), 93-103.
Faeth, S. H., Bang, C., & Saari, S. (2011). Urban biodiversity: patterns and mechanisms. In R.
S. Ostfeld & W. H. Schlesinger (Eds.), Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology (Vol. 1223,
pp. 69-81). Oxford: Blackwell Science Publ.
Fan, F., Wang, Y., Qiu, M., & Wang, Z. (2009). Evaluating the Temporal and Spatial Urban
Expansion Patterns of Guangzhou from 1979 to 2003 by Remote Sensing and GIS Methods.
International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 23(11).
Fausold, C. J., & Lilieholm, R. J. (1999). The Economic Value of Open Space: A Review and
Synthesis. Environmental Management, 23(3), 307-320.
D-13
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Fiksel, J. (2001). Emergence of a sustainable business community. Pure and Applied
Chemistry, 73(8).
Fiksel, J. (2006). A framework for sustainable materials management. Jom, 58(8).
Fiksel, J., Bakshi, B., & leee. (2010). Industrial Ecology Network Optimization with Life Cycle
Metrics.
Fiksel, J., Bakshi, B. R., Baral, A., Guerra, E., & DeQuervain, B. (2011). Comparative life cycle
assessment of beneficial applications for scrap tires. Clean Technologies and Environmental
Policy, 13(1).
Florida, R. L. (2000). Competing in the age of talent: quality of place and the new economy.
Pittsburgh: R. K. Mellon Foundation, Heinz Endowments, and Sustainable Pittsburgh.
Fodor, E. (2012). Relationship Between Growth and Prosperity in the 100 Largest U.S.
Metropolitan Areas. Economic Development Quarterly, 26(3), 220-230.
Forman, H., Kerr, J., Norman, G. J., Saelens, B. E., Durant, N. H., Harris, S. K., et al. (2008).
Reliability and validity of destination-specific barriers to walking and cycling for youth.
Preventive Medicine, 46(A).
Francis, C. A., Hansen, T. E., Fox, A. A., Hesje, P. J., Nelson, H. E., Lawseth, A. E., et al. (2012).
Farmland conversion to non-agricultural uses in the US and Canada: current impacts and
concerns for the future. [Article]. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 10(1),
8-24.
Frank, J. E. (1989). The costs of alternative development patterns : a review of the literature.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute.
Frank, L., Bradley, M., Kavage, S., Chapman, J., & Lawton, T. K. (2008a). Urban form, travel
time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice. [Article]. Transportation,
35(1), 37-54.
Frank, L., Bradley, M., Kavage, S., Chapman, J., & Lawton, T. K. (2008b). Urban form, travel
time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice. Transportation, 35(1).
Frank, L., Kerr, J., Saelens, B., Sallis, J., Glanz, K., & Chapman, J. (2009). Food outlet visits,
physical activity and body weight: variations by gender and race-ethnicity. British Journal of
Sports Medicine, 43(2).
Frank, L. D., Greenwald, M. J., Winkelman, S., Chapman, J., & Kavage, S. (2010). Carbonless
footprints: Promoting health and climate stabilization through active transportation.
Preventive Medicine, 50.
D-14
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Frank, L. D., Kerr, J., Sallis, J. F., Miles, R., & Chapman, J. (2008). A hierarchy of
sociodemographic and environmental correlates of walking and obesity. Preventive
Medicine, 47(2).
Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., Chapman, J., Sallis, J. F., Kerr, J., Glanz, K., et al. (2012). Objective
Assessment of Obesogenic Environments in Youth Geographic Information System Methods
and Spatial Findings from the Neighborhood Impact on Kids Study. American Journal of
Preventive Medicine, 42(5).
Frank, L. D., Sallis, J. F., Conway, T. L., E., C. J., Saelens , B. E., & Bachman, W. (2006). Many
Pathways from Land Use to Health: Associations between Neighborhood Walkability and
Active Transportation, Body Mass Index, and Air Quality, [research-article]. Journal of the
American Planning Association, 72(1), 75-87.
Freeland, A. L., Banerjee, S. N., Dannenberg, A. L., & Wendel, A. M. (2013). Walking
associated with public transit: Moving toward increased physical activity in the United
States. American Journal of Public Health, 103(3), 536-542.
French, S. A., Story, M., & Jeffery, R. W. (2001). Environmental influences on eating and
physical activity. Annual review of public health, 22, 309-335.
Frost, S. S., Goins, R. T., Hunter, R. H., Hooker, S. P., Bryant, L. L., Kruger, J., et al. (2010).
Effects of the built environment on physical activity of adults living in rural settings.
American journal of health promotion : AJHP, 24(A).
Frumkin, H. (2002). Urban sprawl and public health. Public Health Reports, 117(3), 201-217.
Frumkin, H. (2003). Healthy places: Exploring the evidence. American Journal of Public
Health, 93(9).
Fugate, J. N., Silberberg-Robinson., S. C., Fugate, J. N., Architecture., M. I. o. T. D. o.,
Planning., M. I. o. T. D. o. U. S. a., & Architecture., M. I. o. T. D. o. (2007). Shrinking
gracefully : looking for effective planning and design approaches for small town America.
Unpublished Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Fujiwara, T., & Kawachi, I. (2008). Social capital and health - A study of adult twins in the US.
[Article]. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2), 139-144.
Fullilove MT, G. V., Jimenez W, Parson C, Green LL, Fullilove RE. (1998). Injury and anomie:
effects of violence on an inner-city community, [research-article]. Journal of Public Health,
88(6), 924-927.
Gallagher, J., Gill, L. W., & McNabola, A. (2011). Optimizing the use of on-street car parking
system as a passive control of air pollution exposure in street canyons by large eddy
simulation. Atmospheric Environment, 45(9), 1684-1694.
D-15
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Gardsjord, H. S. T. M. S. N. H. (2013). Promoting Youths Physical Activity through Park
Design: Linking Theory and Practice in a Public Health Perspective. Landscape Research
Landscape Research(47), 1-12.
Garvin, E., Branas, C., Keddem, S., Sellman, J., & Cannuscio, C. (2013). More Than Just An
Eyesore: Local Insights And Solutions on Vacant Land And Urban Health. Journal of Urban
Health, 90(3), 412-426.
Ghosh, J. K. C., jokay@ucla.edu, Wilhelm, M., Su, J., Goldberg, D., Cockburn, M., et al. (2012).
Assessing the Influence of Traffic-related Air Pollution on Risk of Term Low Birth Weight on
the Basis of Land-Use-based Regression Models and Measures of Air Toxics. American
Journal of Epidemiology, 175(12), 1262-1274.
Gidlof-Gunnarsson, A., & Ohrstrom, E. (2007). Noise and well-being in urban residential
environments: The potential role of perceived availability to nearby green areas. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 83(2-3), 115-126.
Gilbert, O. L. (1989). The ecology of urban habitats. London; New York: Chapman and Hall.
Giles-Corti B, B. M., Knuiman M, Collins C, Douglas K, Ng K, Lange A, Donovan RJ. (2005).
Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open
space? - Abstract - UK PubMed Central. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2).
God bey, G. C., Caldwell, L. L., Floyd, M., & Payne, L. L. (2005). Contributions of leisure
studies and recreation and park management research to the active living agenda. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 150-158.
Goetz, S. J., Jantz, C. A., Prince, S. D., Smith, A. J., Varlyguin, D., & Wright, R. K. (2004).
Integrated analysis of ecosystem interactions with land use change: The Chesapeake Bay
watershed. In R. S. DeFries, G. P. Asner & R. A. Houghton (Eds.), Ecosystems and Land Use
Change (Vol. 153, pp. 263-275). Washington: American Geophysical Union.
Goldstein, J. H., Caldarone, G., Duarte, T. K., Ennaanay, D., Hannahs, N., Mendoza, G., et al.
(2012). Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. [Article].
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(19),
7565-7570.
Gordon-Larsen, P., McMurray, R. G., & Popkin, B. M. (2000). Determinants of adolescent
physical activity and inactivity patterns. Pediatrics, 105(6).
Grahn, P., & Stigsdotter, U. A. (2003). Landscape planning and stress. Urban Forestry &
Urban Greening, 2(1), 1-18.
Gramlich, E. M. (2002). Remarks by Governor Edward M. Gramlich. Paper presented at the
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland Conference on Livable Communities: Linking Community
Development and Smart Growth, Cincinnati, OH.
D-16
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Green, C. G., & Klein, E. G. (2011). Promoting Active Transportation as a Partnership
Between Urban Planning and Public Health: The Columbus Healthy Places Program. Public
Health Reports, 126, 41-49.
Griffin, B. A., Eibner, C., Bird, C. E., Jewell, A., Margolis, K., Shih, R., et al. (2013). The
relationship between urban sprawl and coronary heart disease in women. Health Place, 20,
51-61.
Grossarth, S. K., & Hecht, A. D. (2007). Sustainability at the US Environmental Protection
Agency: 1970-2020. Ecological Engineering, 30(1).
Guite HF, C. C., Ackrill G. (2006). The impact of the physical and urban environment on
mental well-being. Public Health, 120(12), 1117-1126.
Haas, P. (2010). Transit Oriented Development and The Potential for VMT-
related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Growth Reduction. Oakland, Calif.?: Center for Transit
Oriented Development.
Hacking, T. G., Peter. (2008). A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line,
Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,
28(lssues 2-3), 73-89.
Handy, S., Sallis, J. F., Weber, D., Maibach, E., & Hollander, M. (2008). Is Support for
Traditionally Designed Communities Growing? Evidence From Two National Surveys,
[research-article]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(2), 209-221.
Harnik, P., & Welle, B. (2011). From Fitness Zones to the Medical Mile: How Urban Park
Systems Can Best Promote Health and Wellness: The Trust for Public Land.
Hartig, T., & Staats, H. (2006). The need for psychological restoration as a determinant of
environmental preferences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(3), 215-226.
Haskell, D. G. (2000). Effects of forest roads on macroinvertebrate soil fauna of the
Southern Appalachian mountains. Conservation Biology, 14(1).
Hasse, J. E., & Lathrop, R. G. (2003). Land resource impact indicators of urban sprawl.
Applied Geography, 23(lssues 2-3), 159-175.
Havens, K. E., & Gawlik, D. E. (2005). Lake Okeechobee conceptual ecological model.
Wetlands, 25(4).
Hazards and Vulnerability Institute. (2012). Social Vulnerability Index for the United States,
from http://webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/products/sovi ^2.aspx
Heaney, C. D., Sams, E., Dufour, A. P., Brenner, K. P., Haugland, R. A., Chern, E., et al. (2012).
Fecal Indicators in Sand, Sand Contact, and Risk of Enteric Illness Among Beachgoers.
Epidemiology, 23(1).
D-17
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Hecht, A. (2009). Government Perspectives on Sustainability. Chemical Engineering Progress,
105(1).
Hecht, A. D., & Miller, C. A. (2010). Perspectives on achieving sustainable energy production
and use. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 2(3).
HEI Panel on the Health Effects of Traffic-Related Air Pollution. (2010). Traffic-Related Air
Pollution: A Critical Review of the Literature on Emissions, Exposure, and Health Effects
(Special Report No. Special Report 17). Boston: Health Effects Institute.
Heimlich, R. E., & Anderson, W. D. (2001). Development at the urban fringe and beyond
impacts on agriculture and rural land. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service.
Heinonen, J., Kyro, R., & Junnila, S. (2011). Dense downtown living more carbon intense due
to higher consumption: a case study of Helsinki. [Text]. Environmental Research Letters, 6(3).
Heschong, L. (2002). Daylighting and Human Performance. ASHRAE, 44(6), 65-67.
Hester, R. T. (2006). Design for ecological democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Hodgson, K. (2011). Comprehensive Planning for Public Health: Results of the Planning and
Community Health Research Center Survey: American Planning Association, PLANNING &
COMMUNITY HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER.
Hoehner, C. M., Brownson, R. C., Allen, D., Gramann, J., Behrens, T. K., Floyd, M. F., et al.
(2010). Parks promoting physical activity: synthesis of findings from interventions in seven
national parks. Journal of physical activity & health, 7 Suppl 1.
Hoehner, C. M., Handy, S. L., Yan, Y., Blair, S. N., & Berrigan, D. (2011). Association between
neighborhood walkability, cardiorespiratory fitness and body-mass index. Social Science &
Medicine, 73(12).
Hof, B., Heyma, A., & van der Hoorn, T. (2012). Comparing the performance of models for
wider economic benefits of transport infrastructure: results of a Dutch case study. [Article].
Transportation, 39(6), 1241-1258.
Hogan, D. M., Labiosa, W., Pearlstine, L., Hallac, D., Strong, D., Hearn, P., etal. (2012).
Estimating the Cumulative Ecological Effect of Local Scale Landscape Changes in South
Florida. [Article]. Environmental Management, 49(2), 502-515.
Holcombe, R., & Staley, S. (2001). Smarter Growth: market-based strategies for land use
planning in the 21st century. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
Holden, E., & Norland, I. (2005). Three challenges for the compact city as a sustainable
urban form: Household consumption of energy and transport in eight residential areas in
the greater Oslo Region. Urban Studies, 42(12), 2145-2166.
D-18
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Hollander, J., Polsky, C., Zinderr, D., & Runfola, D. (2011). The New American Ghost Towns.
Land Lines, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Hollander, J. B. (2011). Can a City Successfully Shrink? Evidence from Survey Data on
Neighborhood Quality. Urban Affairs Review, 47(1), 129-141.
Hollander, J. B., & Nemeth, J. (2011). The bounds of smart decline: a foundational theory for
planning shrinking cities, [research-article]. Housing Policy Debate.
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A
meta-analytic review. [Review]. PLOS Medicine, 7(7).
Horner, R. R., Booth, D. B., Azous, A., & May, C. W. (1997). Watershed determinants of
ecosystem functioning. In L. A. Roesner, E. Shaver, R. R. Horner, U. S. E. P. Agency, A. S. o. C.
Engineers, U. W. R. R. Council & A. P. W. Association. (Eds.), Effects of watershed
development and management on aquatic ecosystems : proceedings of an engineering
foundation conference. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Horsley Witten Group Inc. (2012). Community Guidance to Maintain Working Farms and
Forests. Retrieved from
http://www.dem.ri.qov/proqrams/bpoladm/suswshed/pdfs/farmfor.pdf.
Hsiang, S. M., Burke, M., & Miguel, E. (2013). Quantifying the Influence of Climate on
Human Conflict. Science.
Hume, K. I., Brink, M., & Basner, M. (2012). Effects of environmental noise on sleep. [Article].
Noise & Health, 14(61), 297-302.
Ignatieva, M., Stewart, G. H., & Meurk, C. (2011). Planning and design of ecological
networks in urban areas. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 7(1), 17-25.
Imhoff, M. L., Lawrence, W. T., Elvidge, C. D., Paul, T., Levine, E., Privalsky, M. V., et al.
(1997). Using nighttime DMSP/OLS images of city lights to estimate the impact of urban
land use on soil resources in the United States ~. 59(1), 105-117.
International City County Management Association. (2010). Local Government Sustainability
Policies and Programs, 2010. Washington, DC: International City County Management
Association,.
International City/County Management Association. (2010). Putting Smart Growth To Work
in Rural Communities.
Irwin, E., & Bockstael, N. (2004). Land use externalities, open space preservation, and urban
sprawl. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(6), 705-725.
Jabareen, Y. R. (2006). Sustainable Urban Forms Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts.
Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26(1), 38-52.
D-19
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Jackson, K. T. (1985). Crabgrass frontier: the suburbanization of the United States. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Jacobsen, P. L. (2003). Safety in numbers: More walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and
bicycling. [Article]. Injury Prevention, 9(3), 205-209.
Jacobson, J., & Forsyth, A. (2008). Seven American TODs: Good practices for urban design in
Transit-Oriented Development projects. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 1(2), 51-88.
James, P., Troped, P. J., Hart, J. E., Joshu, C. E., Colditz, G. A., Brownson, R. C., et al. (2013).
Urban Sprawl, Physical Activity, and Body Mass Index: Nurses' Health Study and Nurses'
Health Study II. Am J Public Health, 103(2), 369-375.
James, P., Tzoulas, K., Adams, M. D., Barber, A., Box, J., Breuste, J., et al. (2009). Towards an
integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment. Urban Forestry
& Urban Greening, 8(2), 65-75.
Jenerette, G. D., Harlan, S. L., Stefanov, W. L., & Martin, C. A. (2011). Ecosystem services and
urban heat riskscape moderation: water, green spaces, and social inequality in Phoenix, USA.
[Article]. Ecological Applications, 21(7), 2637-2651.
Jenks, M., Burton, E., & Williams, K. (1996). The Compact city: a sustainable urban form?
London; New York: E & FN Spon.
Jha, M. K., & Kim, E. (2006). Highway route optimization based on accessibility, proximity,
and land-use changes. [Article]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 132(5), 435-439.
Jo, H. K., & McPherson, E. G. (2001). Indirect carbon reduction by residential vegetation and
planting strategies in Chicago, USA. Journal of Environmental Management, 61(2), 165-177.
Jordan, S., & Benson, W. (In preparation). Governance and the Gulf of Mexico coast: How
are current policies contributing to sustainability? Sustainability(Spec\a\ issue: Government
Policy and Sustainability).
Jordan, S., & Summers, J. (2012). Environmental Sustainability, Ecosystem Services, and
Human Weil-Being. In R. H. Friis (Ed.), Praeger Handbook of Environmental Health, Vol. 4:
Current Issues and Emerging Debates (Vol. 4, pp. 569-587).
Joshu, C. E., Boehmer, T. K., Brownson, R. C., & Ewing, R. (2008). Personal, neighbourhood
and urban factors associated with obesity in the United States. Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 62(3).
Kaczynski, A. T., & Henderson, K. A. (2008). Parks and recreation settings and active living: a
review of associations with physical activity function and intensity. Journal of physical
activity & health, 5(4).
D-20
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Kaczynski, A. T., Johnson, A. J., & Saelens, B. E. (2010). Neighborhood land use diversity and
physical activity in adjacent parks. Health & place, 16(2).
Kaczynski, A. T., & Mowen, A. J. (2011). Does self-selection influence the relationship
between park availability and physical activity? Preventive Medicine, 52(1).
Kaczynski, A. T., Potwarka, L. R., & Saelens, B. E. (2008). Association of park size, distance,
and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks. American Journal of Public Health,
98(8).
Kaczynski, A. T., & Sharratt, M. T. (2010). Deconstructing Williamsburg: Using focus groups
to examine residents' perceptions of the building of a walkable community. International
Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7.
Kaczynski, A. T., Stanis, S. A. W., & Besenyi, G. M. (2012). Development and Testing of a
Community Stakeholder Park Audit Tool. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 42(3).
Kaczynski, A. T., Wilhelm Stanis, S. A., Hastmann, T. J., & Besenyi, G. M. (2011). Variations in
observed park physical activity intensity level by gender, race, and age: individual and joint
effects. Journal of physical activity & health, 8 Suppl 2.
Kang, R. S., Storm, D. E., & Marston, R. A. (2010). DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS OF
URBANIZATION ON STILLWATER CREEK, OKLAHOMA. [Article], Physical Geography, 31(2),
186-201.
Kaplan, R. (2001). The Nature of the View from Home: Psychological Benefits. Environment
and Behavior, 33(4), 507-542.
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182.
Karner, A. A., Eisinger, D. S., & Niemeier, D. A. (2010). Near-roadway air quality:
Synthesizing the findings from real-world data. [Review]. Environmental Science &
Technology, 44(14), 5334-5344.
Katz, P. (2010). Sarasota's smart growth dividend. Planning Planning, 76(10), 26-29.
Kazmierczak, A. (2013). The contribution of local parks to neighbourhood social ties.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 109(1), 31-44.
Keeley, M. (2011). The Green Area Ratio: an urban site sustainability metric. [Text]. Journal
of Environmental Planning and Management, 54(7), 937-958.
Keeney, R. L. (2006). Eliciting knowledge about values for public policy decisions.
International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 5(4).
D-21
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Kennedy, C. A. (2002). A comparison of the sustainability of public and private
transportation systems: Study of the Greater Toronto Area. Transportation, 29(A), 459-493.
Kenway, S. J., Lant, P., & Priestley, T. (2011). Quantifying water-energy links and related
carbon emissions in cities. [Article]. Journal of Water and Climate Change, 2(4), 247-259.
Kerr, J., Frank, L., Sallis, J. F., & Chapman, J. (2007). Urban form correlates of pedestrian
travel in youth: Differences by gender, race-ethnicity and household attributes.
Transportation Research Part D-Transport and Environment, 12(3).
Kim, H. S., & Kim, E. (2004). Effects of public transit on automobile ownership and use in
households of the USA. [Article]. Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, 16(3),
245-262.
King, A. C., Sallis, J. F., Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., Cain, K., Conway, T. L., et al. (2011). Aging
in neighborhoods differing in walkability and income: Associations with physical activity and
obesity in older adults. Social Science & Medicine, 73(10).
King, K. (2013). Jane Jacobs and 'The Need for Aged Buildings': Neighbourhood Historical
Development Pace and Community Social Relations. Urban Studies, 50(12), 2407-2424.
Kitamura, R. (2009). The effects of added transportation capacity on travel: A review of
theoretical and empirical results. [Article]. Transportation, 36(6), 745-762.
Klein, R. D. (1976). Urbanization and stream quality impairment. Water Resources Bulletin,
15(4), 948-963.
Knaap, G.-J., Song, Y., & Nedovic-Budic, Z. (2007). Measuring Patterns of Urban
Development: New Intelligence for the War on Sprawl, [research-article]. Local
Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 12(3), 239-257.
Knudsen, B., Florida, R., Stolarick, K., & Gates, G. (2008). Density and Creativity in U.S.
Regions, [research-article]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(2), 461-
478.
Kochtitzky, C. S., Freeland, A. L., & Yen, I. H. (2011). Ensuring mobility-supporting
environments for an aging population: critical actors and collaborations. Journal of aging
research, 2011.
Kopits, E., McConnell, V., & Miles, D. (2012). Lot size, zoning, and household preferences.
Housing Policy Debate, 22(2), 153-173.
Kotchen, M. J., & Schulte, S. L. (2009). A meta-analysis of cost of community service studies.
Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. International Regional Science Review, 32(3), 376-399.
Kramer, M. (2013). Our Built and Natural Environments. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.gov/smartqrowth/built.htm.
D-22
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Krane, D., Rigos, P. N., & Hill, M. B. (2001). Home rule in America: a fifty-state handbook.
Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Krizek, K. J. (2011). Residential Relocation and Changes in Urban Travel: Does
Neighborhood-Scale Urban Form Matter? [research-article]. Journal of the American
Planning Association, 69(3), 265-281.
Kroeger, T. (2008). Open Space Property Value Premium Analysis. Washington DC: Report
Prepared for the National Council for Science and the Environment as Part of the Project
"Development of an Operational Benefits Estimation Tool for the U.S.".
Kubiszewski, I., Costanza, R., Franco, C., Lawn, P., Talberth, J., Jackson, T., et al. (2013).
Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress. Ecological Economics, 93,
57-68.
Kumar, J. A. V., Pathan, S. K., & Bhanderi, R. J. (2007). Spatio-temporal analysis for
monitoring urban growth - A case study of indore city. Photonirvachak-Journal of the Indian
Society of Remote Sensing, 35(1).
Kunstler, J. H. (1993). The geography of nowhere : the rise and decline of America's man-
made landscape. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kuo, F., Sullivan, W., Coley, R., & Brunson, L. (1998). Fertile Ground for Community: Inner-
City Neighborhood Common Spaces. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(6),
823-851.
Kuo, F. E. (2003). The Role of Arboriculture in a Healthy Social Ecology. Journal of
arboriculture., 29, 148-155.
Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001a). Aggression and Violence in the Inner City: Effects of
Environment via Mental Fatigue. Environment and Behavior, 33(A), 543-571.
Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001b). Environment and Crime in the Inner City: Does
Vegetation Reduce Crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), 343-367.
La Greca, P., La Rosa, D., Martinico, F., & Privitera, R. (2011). Agricultural and green
infrastructures: The role of non-urbanised areas for eco-sustainable planning in a
metropolitan region. [Article; Proceedings Paper]. Environmental Pollution, 159(8-9), 2193-
2202.
Lachapelle, U., Frank, L., Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., & Conway, T. L. (2011). Commuting by
public transit and physical activity: where you live, where you work, and how you get there.
Journal of physical activity & health, 8 Suppl 1.
Lachowycz, K., & Jones, A. P. (2011). Greenspace and obesity: a systematic review of the
evidence. [Article]. Obesity Reviews, 12(501), el83-el89.
D-23
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Ladd, H. F. (1992). Population Growth, Density and the Costs of Providing Public Services.
Urban Studies, 29(2), 273-295.
Lambert, D. (2007). Assets and liabilities - what's that park worth? putting a cash value on a
park's assets is the only way of securing long-term revenue funding. Green Places, 35, 26-27.
Larson, E. K. a. P., C. (2013). The value of water-related amenities in an arid city: The case of
the Phoenix metropolitan area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109(1), 45-55.
Laverne, R. J., & Winson-Geideman, K. (2003). The Influence of Trees and Landscaping on
Rental Rates at Office Buildings. Journal of arboriculture., 29, 281-290.
Lee, C., & Moudon, A. V. (2006). The 3Ds + R: Quantifying land use and urban form
correlates of walking. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 11(3),
204-215.
Lee, I. M., Ewing, R., & Sesso, H. D. (2009). The Built Environment and Physical Activity
Levels The Harvard Alumni Health Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37(4).
Lee, I. M., Shiroma, E. J., Lobelo, F., Puska, P., Blair, S. N., Katzmarzyk, P. T., et al. (2012).
Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of
burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet, 380(9838).
Lee, J. G., & Heaney, J. P. (2003). Estimation of urban imperviousness and its impacts on
storm water systems. [Article]. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management-ASCE,
129(5), 419-426.
Leinberger, C. B., & Alfonzo, M. (2012). Walk this Way: The Economic Promise of
Walkable Places in Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C.: Metropolitan Policy
Program at the Brookings Institution.
Levine, J. (2005). Zoned out: regulation, markets, and choices in transportation and
metropolitan land-use. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
Levine, J., & Frank, L. D. (2007). Transportation and land-use preferences and residents'
neighborhood choices: the sufficiency of compact development in the Atlanta region.
Transportation, 34(2).
Lewis, R., Knapp, G., Schindewolf, & Jamie. (2013). The Spatial Structure of Cities in the
United States.Unpublished manuscript.
Leyden, K. M. (2003). Social capital and the built environment: The importance of walkable
neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1546-1551.
Liang, B., & Weng, Q. (2011). Assessing Urban Environmental Quality Change of Indianapolis,
United States, by the Remote Sensing and GIS Integration, leee Journal of Selected Topics in
Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 4(1).
D-24
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Lipkis, A., & Lipkis, K. (1990). The simple act of planting a tree : a citizen forester's guide to
healing your neighborhood, your city, and your world. Los Angeles; [S.I.]: J.P. Tarcher;
Distributed by St. Martin's Press.
Litman, T., & Steele, R. (2012). Land use impacts on transport how land use factors affect
travel behavior, from http://www.ssti.us/wp/wp-
content/uploads/2012/07/VTPI 2012 land use+travel.pdf
Litman, T. A. (2003). Economic Value of Walkability. Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, 1828, 3-11.
Lobao, L., & Stofferahn, C. W. (2008). The community effects of industrialized farming:
Social science research and challenges to corporate farming laws. Agriculture and Human
Values, 25(2), 219-240.
Lobdell, D. T., Jagai, J. S., Rappazzo, K., & Messer, L. C. (2011). Data Sources for an
Environmental Quality Index: Availability, Quality, and Utility. American Journal of Public
Health, 101, S277-S285.
Lopez, R. (2004). Urban sprawl and risk for being overweight or obese. American Journal of
Public Health, 94(9).
Lopez, R. (2006). Black-White residential segregation and physical activity. Ethnicity &
Disease, 16(2).
Lopez, R., & Hynes, H. P. (2003). Sprawl In The 1990s: Measurement, Distribution, and
Trends. Urban Affairs Review, 38(3).
Lopez, R. P. (2007). Neighborhood risk factors for obesity. Obesity, 15(8).
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2006). Is it Safe to Walk? Neighborhood Safety and Security
Considerations and Their Effects on Walking. Journal of Planning Literature, 20(3), 219-232.
Lovasi, G. S., Jacobson, J. S., Quinn, J. W., Neckerman, K. M., Ashby-Thompson, M. N., &
Rundle, A. (2011). Is the Environment Near Home and School Associated with Physical
Activity and Adiposity of Urban Preschool Children? Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the
New York Academy of Medicine, 88(6).
Lovejoy, K., Handy, S., & Mokhtarian, P. (2010). Neighborhood satisfaction in suburban
versus traditional environments: An evaluation of contributing characteristics in eight
California neighborhoods. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(1).
Ludwig, J., Duncan, G. J., Gennetian, L. A., Katz, L. F., Kessler, R. C., Kling, J. R., et al. (2012).
Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Weil-Being of Low-Income Adults. Science,
337(6101), 1505-1510.
D-25
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Luttik, J. (2000). The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the
Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48(3-4), 161-167.
Lyman, M. W., Evans, J. R., & Mytar, M. (2011). Community Forests: Needs & Resources for
Creating & Managing Community Forests.
Maantay, J. (2001). Zoning, equity, and public health. American Journal of Public Health,
91(7).
Maas, J., van Dillen, S. M. E., Verheij, R. A., & Groenewegen, P. P. (2009). Social contacts as a
possible mechanism behind the relation between green space and health. Health & Place,
15(2), 586-595.
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., de Vries, S., Spreeuwenberg, P., Schellevis, F. G., & Groenewegen, P.
P. (2009). Morbidity is related to a green living environment. Journal of epidemiology and
community health, 63(12), 967-973.
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., Vries, S. d., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2006). Green
space, urbanity and health: how strong is the relation? , from
http://www.nivel.nl/node/2zt^o?database=ChoicePublicat&priref=2274
Manning, W. J. (2008). Plants in urban ecosystems: Essential role of urban forests in urban
metabolism and succession toward sustainability. [Article; Proceedings Paper]. International
Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 15(4), 362-370.
Marshall, J. D., Brauer, M., & Frank, L. D. (2009). Healthy Neighborhoods: Walkability and
Air Pollution. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117(11).
Maryland Department of Planning. (2011). PlanMaryland: Draft plan. Retrieved from
http://plan.maryland.qov/PDF/draftPlan/pmddraft April.pdf.
Mattera, P., & LeRoy, G. (2003). The Jobs Are Back in Town: Urban Smart Growth and
Construction Employment. Washington, D.C.: Good Jobs First.
McConnell, V. W. M. A. R. f. t. F. (2005). The value of open space : evidence from studies of
nonmarket benefits. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
McDonald, K. N., Oakes, J. M., & Forsyth, A. (2012). Effect of street connectivity and density
on adult BMI: results from the Twin Cities Walking Study. Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 66(7).
McDonald, N. C. (2008). Children's mode choice for the school trip: The role of distance and
school location in walking to school. [Article]. Transportation, 35(1), 23-35.
McDonald, R. I., Forman, R. T. T., & Kareiva, P. (2010). Open Space Loss and Land Inequality
in United States' Cities, 1990-2000. PLOS ONE, 5(3).
D-26
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
McDonald, R. I., Kareiva, P., & Forman, R. T. T. (2008). The implications of current and future
urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biological
Conservation, 141, 1695-1703.
McDonnell, M., Pickett, S. A., Groffman, P., Bohlen, P., Pouyat, R., Zipperer, W., et al. (1997).
Ecosystem processes along an urban-to-rural gradient. Urban Ecosystems, 1(1), 21-36.
McKane, R. B., Johnson, L. C., Shaver, G. R., Nadelhoffer, K. J., Rastetter, E. B., Fry, B., et al.
(2002). Resource-based niches provide a basis for plant species diversity and dominance in
arctic tundra. Nature, 415(6867), 68-71.
McKinney, M. (2008). Effects of urbanization on species richness: A review of plants and
animals. Urban Ecosystems, 11(2), 161-176.
McLaren, D. (1992). Compact or dispersed? dilution is no solution. Built Environment, 18(A),
268-284.
McMahon, E., & Benedict, M. (2003). How Cities Use Parks for...Green Infrastructure.
Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
McPherson, E. G. (2003). Northern mountain and prairie community tree guide : benefits,
costs and strategic planting. Davis, CA: Center for Urban Forest Research, USDA Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station.
Meek, S. (2002-). Growing Smart legislative guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the
Management of Change. In S. Meek (Eds.) Available from
http://www.planninq.orq/qrowinqsmart/quidebook/
Medda, F., Nijkamp, P., & Rietveld, P. (2003). Urban land use for transport systems and city
shapes. [Article]. Geographical Analysis, 35(1), 46-57.
Melia, S., Parkhurst, G., & Barton, H. (2011). The paradox of intensification. 18(1), 46-52.
Metz, P. A., Delzer, G.C., Berndt, M.P., Crandall, C.A., and Toccalino, P.L.,. (2007).
Anthropogenic organic compounds in ground water and finished water of community water
systems in the northern Tampa Bay area, Florida, 2002-04. Retrieved from
http://pubs.usqs.qov/sir/2Qo6/';267/.
Mid-America Regional Council. (2010). Parking Lots to Parks: Concepts in Sustainable
Parking Lot Planning and Design Available from
http://www.sustainableskylineskc.orq/assets/ParkinqLotstoParksbook-web.pdf
Miles, R., Coutts, C., & Mohamadi, A. (2012). Neighborhood Urban Form, Social
Environment, and Depression. Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of
Medicine, 89(1).
D-27
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Milla, K., Thomas, M. H., & Ansine, W. (2005). Evaluating the effect of proximity to hog
farms onresidential property values: a GIS-based hedonic price modelapproach. Urban and
Regional Information Systems Association Journal, 17(1), 27-32.
Miltner, R. J., White, D., & Yoder, C. (2004). The biotic integrity of streams in urban and
suburbanizing landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning Landscape and Urban Planning,
69(1), 87-100.
Mindali, 0., Raveh, A., & Salomon, I. (2004). Urban density and energy consumption : a new
look at old statistics. Transportation research. Part A, Policy and practice., 38A(2), 143-162.
Mirabelli, M. C., Wing, S., Marshall, S. W., & Wilcosky, T. C. (2006). Race, poverty, and
potential exposure of middle-school students to air emissions from confined swine feeding
operations. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114(4).
Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health
inequalities: an observational population study. Lancet, 372(9650), 1655-1660.
Moore, R. (2002). How Cities Use Parks to Help Children Learn: The City Parks Forum is a
program of the American Planning
Association funded by the Wallace-Reader's Digest Funds
and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.
Morancho, A. B. (2003). A hedonic valuation of urban green areas. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 66(1), 35-41.
Morenoff, J. D., House, J. S., Hansen, B. B., Williams, D. R., Kaplan, G. A., & Hunte, H. E.
(2007). Understanding social disparities in hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment,
and control: the role of neighborhood context. Social science & medicine (1982), 65(9).
Morgan, J. A., Follett, R. F., Leon Hartwell Allen, J., Grosso, S. D., Derner, J. D., Dijkstra, F., et
al. (2010). Carbon sequestration in agricultural lands of the United States. Journal of Soil
and Water Conservation, 65(1), 6A-13A.
Morse, C. C., Huryn, A. D., & Cronan, C. (2003). Impervious surface area as a predictor of the
effects of urbanization on stream insect communities in Maine, USA. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 89(1).
Moseley, D., Marzano, M., Chetcuti, J., & Watts, K. (2013). Green networks for people:
Application of a functional approach to support the planning and management of
greenspace. Landscape and Urban Planning, 116(0), 1-12.
Mueller-Warrant, G. W., Griffith, S. M., Whittaker, G. W., Banowetz, G. M., Pfender, W. F.,
Garcia, T. S., et al. (2012). Impact of land use patterns and agricultural practices on water
D-28
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
quality in the Calapooia River Basin of western Oregon. [Article]. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, 67(3), 183-201.
Mumford, K. G., Contant, C. K., Weissman, J., Wolf, J., & Glanz, K. (2011). Changes in
Physical Activity and Travel Behaviors in Residents of a Mixed-Use Development. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(5).
Munroe, D. K., & York, A. M. (2003). Jobs, Houses, and Trees: Changing Regional Structure,
Local Land-Use Patterns, and Forest Cover in Southern Indiana. Growth and Change, 34(3),
299-320.
Muro, M., & Puentes, R. (2004). Investing in a better future : a review of the fiscal and
competitive advantages of smarter growth development patterns. Washington, DC: Center
on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, the Brookings Institution.
Nagy, R. C., & Lockaby, B. G. (2011). Urbanization in the Southeastern United States:
Socioeconomic forces and ecological responses along an urban-rural gradient. [Article].
Urban Ecosystems, 14(1), 71-86.
National Association of Home Builders. (2001). Housing Facts, Figures and Trends 2001.
Washington, D.C.: National Association of Home Builders.
National Association of Local Government Environmental, P., & Smart Growth Leadership, I.
(2004). Smart growth is smart business : boosting the bottom line & community prosperity.
Washington, D.C.: National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals,
Smart Growth Leadership Institute.
National Research Council. (2009). Driving and built environment. The effects of compact
development on motorized travel, energy use, and C02 emmissions. Special Report 298.
Washington, D.C.
National Research Council. (2011). Sustainability and the U.S. EPA.
National Research Council. (2013). Urban Forestry: Toward an Ecosystem Services Research
Agenda: A Workshop Summary. Washington, D.C.:The National Academies Press.
National Resource Council. (2013). Sustainability for the nation: resource connections and
governance linkages.
National Risk Management Research Laboratory. (2010). Alternative futures analysis of
Farmington Bay Wetlands in the Great Salt Lake Ecosystem. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.orq/.
Nelson, A. C. (2012). The TDR handbook : designing and implementing successful transfer of
development rights programs. Washington, DC: Island Press.
D-29
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Nelson, A. C., Pendall, R., Dawkins, C. J., & Knaap, G. J. (2002). The link between growth
management and housing affordability : the academic evidence. Washington, D.C.:
Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
Nelson, A. C., & Peterman, D. R. (2000). Does Growth Management Matter? The Effect of
Growth Management on Economic Performance. Journal of Planning Education and
Research, 19(3), 277-285.
Neuman, M. (2005). The Compact City Fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research,
25(1), 11-26.
New Jersey State Planning Commission. (2001). New Jersey State Development and
Redevelopment Plan. Retrieved from http://ni.qov/state/planninq/publications/i';zt-
infrastructure-needs-assessment-03Qioi.pdf.
Nilon, C. H., & Pais, R. C. (1997). Terrestrial vertebrates in urban ecosystems: developing
hypotheses for the Gwynns Falls Watershed in Baltimore, Maryland. Urban Ecosystems, 1(4),
247.
Northridge, M. E., & Freeman, L. (2011). Urban Planning and Health Equity. Journal of Urban
Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 88(3), 582-597.
Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., & Lapoint, E. (2013). Carbon storage and
sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States. Environ. Pollut.
Environmental Pollution, 178, 229-236.
Nowak, D. J., & Walton, J. T. (2005). Projected urban growth (2000-2050) and its estimated
impact on the US forest resource. [Article]. Journal of Forestry, 103(8), 383-389.
Nowak, D. J., Walton, J. T., Dwyer, J. F., Kaya, L. G., & Myeong, S. (2005). The Increasing
Influence of Urban Environments on US Forest Management. [Text]. Journal of Forestry,
103(8), 377-382.
Nweke, O. C., Garcia, L., Lee, C., Case, H., Pcnjne-Sturges, D., Sanders, W. H., Ill, et al. (2011).
Symposium on Integrating the Science of Environmental Justice into Decision-Making at the
Environmental Protection Agency: An Overview. American Journal of Public Health, 101.
O'Connell, J. L., Johnson, L. A., Smith, L. M., McMurry, S. T., & Haukos, D. A. (2012).
Influence of land-use and conservation programs on wetland plant communities of the
semiarid United States Great Plains. [Article]. Biological Conservation, 146(1), 108-115.
O'Connell, T. J., Jackson, L. E., & Brooks, R. P. (2000). Bird Guilds as Indicators of Ecological
Condition in the Central Appalachians, [research-article], http://dx.doi.ora/io.i8qo/ioc;i-
076i(20oo)oiofi7o6:BGAIOEl2.o.CO;2. 10(6), 1706-1721.
D-30
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Oakes, J. M., Forsyth, A., & Schmitz, K. H. (2007). The effects of neighborhood density and
street connectivity on walking behavior: the Twin Cities walking study. [Methodology].
Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, 4(1), 16.
Odefey, J., Detwiler, S., Rousseau, K., Trice, A., Blackwell, R., O'Hara, K., et al. (2012).
Banking on green : a look at how green infrastructure can save municipalities money and
provide economic benefits community-wide : a joint report. Washington, D.C.?: American
Rivers, American Society of Landscape Architects, EcoNorthwest, Water Environment
Federation.
Osteen, C., & Jessica Gottlieb, U. V., Marcel Aillery, Eldon Ball, Jayson Beckman, Allison
Borchers, Roger Claassen, Kelly Day-Rubenstein, Robert Ebel, Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo,
Catherine Greene, Paul Heisey, Daniel Hellerstein, Robert Hoppe, Wen-yuan Huang, Todd
Kuethe, Michael Livingston, Cynthia Nickerson, Marc Ribaudo, Glenn Schaible, Sun Ling
Wang. (2012). Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators. Retrieved from
http://www.ers.usda.qov/publications/eib-economic-information-
bulletin/eibg8.aspx#.UkZsUtLkml.
Partnership for Sustainable, C., United States. Dept. of, A., United States. Dept. of Housing
and Urban, D., United States. Dept. of, T., & United States. Environmental Protection, A.
(2011). Supporting sustainable rural communities, from
http://www.epa.qov/smartqrowth/pdf/2011 n supportinq-sustainable-rural-communities.pdf
Pendall, R., & Carruthers, J. I. (2003). Does density exacerbate income segregation?
Evidence from U.S. metropolitan areas, 1980 to 2000. [research-article]. Housing Policy
Debate, 14(4), 541-589.
Phillips, J., & Goodstein, E. (2007). Growth management and housing prices: the case of
Portland, Oregon. Contemporary Economic Policy, 18(3), 334-344.
Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Grove, J. M., Boone, C. G., Groffman, P. M., Irwin, E., et al.
(2011). Urban ecological systems: Scientific foundations and a decade of progress. [Review].
Journal of Environmental Management, 92(3), 331-362.
Pivo, G., & Fisher, J. D. (2011). The Walkability Premium in Commercial Real Estate
Investments. Real Estate Economics, 39(2).
Polzin, S. E. (1999). Transportation/land-use relationship: Public transit's impact on land use.
[Article]. Journal of Urban Planning & Development, 125(4), 135-151.
Poor, P. J., & Brule, R. (2007). An investigation of the socio-economic aspects of open space
and agricultural land preservation. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 30(3), 165-176.
Popenoe, D. (1979). Urban Sprawl: Some neglected sociological considerations. Sociology
and Social Research, 63, 255-268.
D-31
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Potwarka, L. R., Kaczynski, A. T., & Flack, A. L. (2008). Places to play: association of park
space and facilities with healthy weight status among children. Journal of community health,
33(5).
PricewaterhouseCoopers L. L. P., & Lend Lease Real Estate Investments. (2002). Emerging
trends in real estate 2003. New York: PricewaterhouseCoopers and Lend Lease Real Estate
Investments.
Quigley, R., den Broeder, L., Furu, P., Bond, A., Cave, B., & Bos, R. (2006). Health Impact
Assessment: International Best Practice Principles. Fargo, ND: International Association for
Impact Assessment.
Radeloff, V. C., Nelson, E., Plantinga, A. J., Lewis, D. J., Helmers, D., Lawler, J. J., et al. (2012).
Economic-based projections of future land use in the conterminous United States under
alternative policy scenarios. [Article]. Ecological Applications, 22(3), 1036-1049.
Ramalho, C. E., & Hobbs, R. J. (2012). Time for a change: dynamic urban ecology. Trends in
ecology and evolution., 27(No.3), 180-188.
Raven, J. (2011). Cooling the Public Realm: Climate-Resilient Urban Design. In K. Otto-
Zimmermann (Ed.), Resilient cities : cities and adaptation to climate change - proceedings of
the Global Forum 2010. Dordrecht: Springer.
Regan, C. L., & Horn, S. A. (2005). To nature or not to nature: Associations between
environmental preferences, mood states and demographic factors. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 25(1), 57-66.
Richardson, E. A., Mitchell, R., Hartig, T., de Vries, S., Astell-Burt, T., & Frumkin, H. (2012).
Green cities and health: a question of scale? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health,
66(2).
Richardson, E. A., Pearce, J., Mitchell, R., & Kingham, S. (2013). Role of physical activity in
the relationship between urban green space and health. Public Health, 127(A), 318-324.
Roberto, E. (2008). Commuting to Opportunity: The Working Poor and Commuting in the
United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, Metropolitan Policy Program.
Rohan, A. M. K., Booske, B. C., & Remington, P. L. (2013). Using the Wisconsin County Health
Rankings to Catalyze Commu... : Journal of Public Health Management and Practice. Journal
of Public Health Management and Practice, 15(1), 24-32.
Ross, C. L., Leone de Nie, K., Dannenberg, A. L., Beck, L. F., Marcus, M. J., & Barringer, J.
(2012). Health Impact Assessment of the Atlanta BeltLine. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 42(3), 203-213.
D-32
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2007). Sacramento Region Blueprint.
Sacramento, CA: Sacramento Area Council of Governments,.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., & Frank, L. D. (2003). Environmental correlates of walking and
cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Annals of
behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 25(2).
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Frank, L. D., Couch, S. C., Zhou, C., Colburn, T., et al. (2012).
Obesogenic Neighborhood Environments, Child and Parent Obesity The Neighborhood
Impact on Kids Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 42(5).
Saelens, B. E., Sails, J. F., Frank, L. D., Cain, K. L., Conway, T. L., Chapman, J. E., et al. (2012).
Neighborhood Environment and Psychosocial Correlates of Adults' Physical Activity.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 44(4).
Sahely, H. R., Dudding, S., & Kennedy, C. A. (2003). Estimating the urban metabolism of
Canadian cities: Greater Toronto Area case study. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,
30(2), 468-483.
Sallis, J. F., Floyd, M. F., Rodriguez, D. A., & Saelens, B. E. (2012). Role of Built Environments
in Physical Activity, Obesity, and Cardiovascular Disease. Circulation, 125(5).
Sallis, J. F., Nader, P. R., Broyles, S. L., Berry, C. C., Elder, J. P., McKenzie, T. L., et al. (1993).
Correlates of physical activity at home in Mexican-American and Anglo-American preschool
children. Health Psychology, 12(5), 390-398.
Sallis, J. F., Slymen, D. J., Conway, T. L., Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., Cain, K., et al. (2011).
Income disparities in perceived neighborhood built and social environment attributes.
Health & Place, 17(6).
Sarzynski, A., Wolman, H. L., Galster, G., & Hanson, R. (2006). Testing the Conventional
Wisdom about Land Use and Traffic Congestion: The More We Sprawl, the Less We Move?
Urban Studies, 43(3), 601-626.
Schilling, J., & Linton, L. S. (2005). The public health roots of zoning - In search of active
living's legal genealogy. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2).
Schilling, J., & Logan, J. (2008). Greening the Rust Belt: A Green Infrastructure Model for
Right Sizing America's Shrinking Cities. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(4),
451-466.
Schneider, A., Logan, K. E., & Kucharik, C. J. (2012). Impacts of Urbanization on Ecosystem
Goods and Services in the U.S. Corn Belt. [Article]. Ecosystems, 15(4), 519-541.
Schneider, A., Woodcock, C. E., Schneider, A., & Woodcock, C. E. (2008). Compact,
Dispersed, Fragmented, Extensive? A Comparison of Urban Growth in Twenty-five Global
D-33
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Cities using Remotely Sensed Data, Pattern Metrics and Census Information. Urban Studies,
45(3), 659-692.
Schueler, T. (2000). Microbes and urban watersheds: Concentrations, sources, and
pathways. In T. Schueler & H. Holland (Eds.), The Practice of Watershed Protection (pp. 68-
78). Ellicott City, MD: Center for Watershed Protection.
Schueler, T. R. (1994). The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques,
1(3), 100-111.
Seliske, L., Pickett, W., & Janssen, I. (2012). Urban sprawl and its relationship with active
transportation, physical activity and obesity in Canadian youth. Health Rep, 23(2), 17-25.
Sen, A. K., Thakuriah, V., Metaxatos, P., Prasad, V., Yanos, G., Yang, D.-H., et al. (1998).
Highways and urban decentralization : final report. Chicago, IL: Urban Transportation Center,
University of Illinois at Chicago.
Seto, K. C., Sanchez-Rodriquez, R., & Fragkias, M. (2010). The new geography of
contemporary urbanization and the environment. Annual Review of Environment and
Resources, 35, 167-194.
Shadewald, J. K., Hallmark, S., & Souleyrette, R. R. (2001). Visualizing system-wide economic
impacts of transportation projects. [Article]. Journal of Urban Planning & Development,
127(A), 158-168.
Shaw, R. P. (1992). The impact of population growth on environment: the debate heats up.
Environmental impact assessment review, 12.
SiadatMousavi, S. M., Jose, F., Stone, G. W., & leee. (2009). Simulating Hurricane Gustav and
Ike Wave Fields along the Louisiana Innershelf: Implementation of an Unstructured Third-
Generation Wave Model, SWAN Oceans 2009, Vols 1-3.
Sidle, R. C., Benson, W. H., Carriger, J. F., & Kamai, T. (2013). Broader perspective on
ecosystem sustainability: Consequences for decision making. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 110(23), 9201-9208.
Sierszen, M. E., Morrice, J. A., Trebitz, A. S., & Hoffman, J. C. (2012). A review of selected
ecosystem services provided by coastal wetlands of the Laurentian Great Lakes, [research-
article]. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 15(1), 92-106.
Sister, C., Wolch, J., & Wilson, J. (2010). Got green? addressing environmental justice in park
provision. GeoJournal, 75(3), 229-248.
Sivam, A., Karuppannan, S., Koohsari, M. J., & Sivam, A. (2012). Does urban design influence
physical activity in the reduction of obesity? A review of evidence. The Open Urban Studies
Journal, 5, 14-21.
D-34
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Slater, S. J., Ewing, R., Powell, L. M., Chaloupka, F. J., Johnston, L. D., & O'Malley, P. M.
(2010). The Association Between Community Physical Activity Settings and Youth Physical
Activity, Obesity, and Body Mass Ind ex. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47(5).
Smart Growth, N., International City/County Management, A., & United States.
Environmental Protection, A. (2002). Getting to smart growth 100 policies for
implementation, from http://purl.access.qpo.qov/GPO/LPS76021
Smith, J., & Snyder, K. (2011). Bridging the Divide Between Science and Planning: Lessons
From Ecosystem-Based Management Approaches to Local and Regional Planning in the
United States: PlaceMatters Institute.
Sommer, R., Learey, F., Summit, J., & Tirrell, M. (1994). Social benefits of resident
involvement in tree planting: comparison with developer-planted trees .Journal of
arboriculture., 20(6), 323.
Source Water Collaborative. (2009a). Your Water. Your Decision. In S. W. Collaborative (Ed.).
Source Water Collaborative. (2009b). Advice Worth Drinking: How Today's Land-Use
Decisions Can Protect Tomorrow's Water Supply. In S. W. Collaborative (Ed.).
South Coast Air Quality Management, D. (2000). Multiple air toxics exposure study in the
South Coast Air Basin MATES-II: final report. Retrieved from
http://www.aqmd.qov/matesiidf/matestoc.htm.
Spatari, S., Yu, Z., & Montalto, F. A. (2011). Life cycle implications of urban green
infrastructure. Environmental Pollution Environmental Pollution, 159(8-9), 2174-2179.
Speck, J. (2012). Walkable city : how downtown can save America, one step at a time. New
York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Speir, C., & Stephenson, K. (2002). Does Sprawl Cost Us All? Isolating the Effects of Housing
Patterns on Public Water and Sewer Costs. JOURNAL- AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION,
68, 56-70.
Spencer, C. B. M. T. A. K. U. O. F. S. W. (2002). VIEWS OF NATURE AND SELF-DISCIPLINE:
EVIDENCE FROM INNER CITY CHILDREN. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1-2), 1-2.
Steedman, R. J. (1988). Modification and assessment of an index of biotic integrity to
quantify stream quality in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences, 45, 492-501.
Stone, B. (2004). Paving over paradise: how land use regulations promote residential
imperviousness. 69(1), 101-113.
D-35
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Stone, B., Hess, J. J., & Frumkin, H. (2010). Urban Form and Extreme Heat Events: Are
Sprawling Cities More Vulnerable to Climate Change Than Compact Cities? Environmental
Health Perspectives, 118(10).
Stone, B., & Norman, J. M. (2006). Land use planning and surface heat island formation: A
parcel-based radiation flux approach. 40(19), 3561-3573.
Storper, M., Scott, A.J. (2009). Rethinking human capital, creativity and urban growth.
Journal of Economic Geography, 9(2), 147-167.
Strategic Economics. (2013). Fiscal impact analysis of three development scenarios in
Nashville-Davidson County, TN: Smart Growth America.
Su, Q. (2011). The effect of population density, road network density, and congestion on
household gasoline consumption in U.S. urban areas. Energy Economics, 33(3), 445-452.
Suarez-Rubio, M., Lookingbill, T. R., & Wainger, L. A. (2012). Modeling exurban development
near Washington, DC, USA: comparison of a pattern-based model and a spatially-explicit
econometric model. [Article]. Landscape Ecology, 27(7), 1045-1061.
Szeto, W. Y., Jaber, X., & O'Mahony, M. (2010). Time-dependent discrete network design
frameworks considering land use. [Article]. Computer-Aided Civil & Infrastructure
Engineering, 25(6), 411-426.
Talen, E. (2008). Design for diversity : exploring socially mixed neighborhoods. Oxford;
Burlington, MA: Architectural Press.
Taylor, A. F., Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Coping With ADD: The Surprising
Connection to Green Play Settings. Environment and Behavior, 33(1), 54-77.
Terrapin Bright Green, L. (2012). The Economics of Biophilia: Why designing With nature in
mind makes financial sense: Terrapin Bright Green lie.
Tewksbury, J. J., Levey, D. J., Haddad, N. M., Sargent, S., Orrock, J. L., Weldon, A., et al.
(2002). Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(20).
The Boston Tree Party. (2011). Boston Tree Party, from http://www.bostontreepartv.orq/
The Trust for Public Land. (2010). The Economic Benefits and Fiscal Impact of Parks and
Open Space in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, New York: for the Long Island Community
Foundation and the Rauch Foundation.
The Trust for Public Land. (2011). North Carolina Economic Benefits Report: North Carolina's
Resturn on Investment in Land Conservation: The Trust for Public Land.
D-36
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., et
al. (2004). Extinction risk from climate change. Nature, 427(6970), 145-148.
Tomita, Y., Terashima, D., Hammad, A., & Hayashi, Y. (2003). Backcast Analysis for Realizing
Sustainable Urban Form in Nagoya. Built environment., 29(1), 16-24.
Torras, M., & Boyce, J. K. (1998). Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the
environmental Kuznets Curve. Ecological Economics, 25(2), 147-160.
Transportation Research Board. (1996). Transit and urban form. Washington: National
Academy Press.
Tree People. (2013). Tree People.
Troped, P. J., Tamura, K., Whitcomb, H. A., & Laden, F. (2011). Perceived Built Environment
and Physical Activity in US Women by Sprawl and Region. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 41(5).
Tscharntke, T., Tylianakis, J. M., Rand, T. A., Didham, R. K., Fahrig, L., Batary, P., et al. (2012).
Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes - eight hypotheses. [Review].
Biological Reviews, 87(3), 661-685.
Tsutsumi, M., & Seya, H. (2008). Measuring the impact of large-scale transportation projects
on land price using spatial statistical models. [Article]. Papers in Regional Science, 87(3),
385-401.
Tu, J., Xia, Z. G., Clarke, K. C., & Frei, A. (2007). Impact of urban sprawl on water quality in
eastern Massachusetts, USA. Environ Manage, 40(2), 183-200.
Tucker, P., Gilliland, J., & Irwin, J. D. (2007). Splashpads, swings, and shade: parents'
preferences for neighbourhood parks. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 98(3), 198-202.
Tucker, P., J. Irwin, J. Gilliland, M. He, K. Larsen, and P. Hess. (2009). Environmental
influences on physical activity levels in youth. Health & Place, 15(1), 357-363.
Turner, D. P., & Koerper, G.J. (1995). Carbon sequestration by forests of the United States.
Current status and projections to the year 2040. Series B Chemical and Physical
Meteorology, 47(1-2), 232-239.
Tweeten, L. G. (1998). Competing for scarce land food security and farmland preservation.
Columbus, OH: Dept. of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio
State University.
Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kazmierczak, A., Niemela, J., et al. (2007).
Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A
literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(3), 167-178.
D-37
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
U.S Census Bureau. (2012). 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Population and
Housing Unit Counts, CPH-2-1, United States Summary. Retrieved from
http://www.census.qov/prod/cen2010/cph-2-1.pdf.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2009). Summary Report: 2007 National Resources
Inventory. Retrieved from
http://www.nrcs.usda.q0v/technical/NRI/2007/2007 NRI Summary.pdf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2009). Land-Use Scenarios: National-Scale Housing-
Density Scenarios Consistent with Climate Change Storylines. Retrieved from
http://cfpub.epa.qov/si/si public record report.cfm?dirEntryld=20^zt';8.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 0. o. R. a. D., National Risk Management Research
Laboratory. (2007). Small Drinking Water Systems: State of the Industry and Treatment
Technologies to Meet the Safe Drinking Water Act Requirements (No. EPA/600/R-07/110).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 0. o. R. a. D., Office of Water. (2002). Onsite
Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual. Retrieved from
http://nepis.epa .qov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/^oooztGXI.txt?Zy Action D=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&lnd
ex=20oo%2oThru%2Q20o';&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=i&TocRestrict
=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&lntQF
ieldOp=o&ExtQFieldQp=o&XmlQuerv=&File=D%^A%';CZYFILES%';CINDEX%2oDATA%';CooT
HRUo';%';CTXT%';Cooooooo2%';C^oooztGXI.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonvmous
&SortMethod=h%7C-
&MaximumDocuments=i&FuzzyDeqree=o&lmaqeQuality=r7|;q8/r7';q8/xi';oyi';oqi6/izt2';&Dis
plav=p%7Cf&DefSeekPaqe=x&SearchBack=ZvActionL&Back=ZvActionS&BackDesc=Results%
2opaqe&MaximumPaqes=i&ZyEntry=2.
Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science,
224(4647), 420-421.
Ulrich, R. S. (1999). Effects of Gardens on Health Outcomes: Theory and Research. In C. C.
Marcus & M. Barnes (Eds.), Healing gardens : therapeutic benefits and design
recommendations. New York: Wiley.
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress
recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 11(3), 201-230.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2001). Our built and natural
environments : a technical review of the interactions between land use, transportation, and
environmental quality. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Development, Community, and Environment Division.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). A Decade of Children's
Environmental Health Research, Highlights from EPA's Science to Achieve Results Program.
D-38
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Retrieved from
http://epa.qov/ncer/publications/research results svnthesis/ceh report 5o8.pdf.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Removing market barriers to green
development principles and action projects to promote widespread adoptiong of green
development practices. [Chicago, IL]: U.S. Environmental Agency, Region 5.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2002a). Consider the Source: A Pocket Guide to
Protecting Your Drinking Water. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.qov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/quide swppocket 2002.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2002b). Underground Storage Tanks and Brownfields
Sites, Washington/Rosalia. Retrieved from http://www.epa.qov/oust/raqs/wa rosalia.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2003). Urban Oaks Organic Farm: Success in EPA
Brownfields Assessment Grant Program. Retrieved Aug 27, 2013, from
http://www.epa.qov/reqioni/brownfields/success/urban oaks ct aqp.html
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2006a). Excessive heat events guidebook. Retrieved
from http://www.epa.qov/heatisland/about/pdf/EHEquide final.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2006b). Former Sage Motel Parcel, Built on a Former
Brownfield, Reno's New Events Center is a Major Venue for Downtown Entertainment.
Retrieved from http://www.epa.qov/brownfields/success/reno nv BRAG.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2007a). A Contaminated, Abandoned Gas Station
Finds New Life in the Sale of Cutting-Edge Biofuels. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.qov/swerosps/bf/success/lane county or.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2007b). Federal Reserve Bank, Houston, Texas,
Petroleum-Impacted Site Renaissance: Brownfields Success Story. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.gov/reqion6/6sf/pdffiles/fedreservebanksuccess2Q07.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2008a). Former Litchfield Property, Habitat for
Humanity Sees a Former Gas Station in Swanton, Vermont as a Perfect fit for Residential
Reuse. Retrieved from http://www.epa.qov/brownfields/success/swanton vt braq.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2008b). In Greenville, SC, Coordinating Resources
form two EPA Programs Maximizes Their Effectiveness and Results. Retrieved from
http://epa.qov/brownfields/success/qreenville.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2008c). Coastal Range Food Bank, Former Post Office
in Blodgett Delivering Hope to Local Residents. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.qov/brownfields/success/blodqett or braq.pdf.
D-39
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2012a). North Portland Bible College, A Former Gas
Station Site to be Reused for Higher Purposes. Retrieved from
http://epa.qov/brownfields/success/oreqon deq npbc braq.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2012b). Residential construction trends in America's
metropolitan regions 2012 edition. Retrieved from
http://www.epa.gov/smartqrowth/pdf/residential construction trends.pdf.
US Environmental Protection Agency. (2012c, March 6, 2012). U.S Census Data on Small
Community Housing and Wastewater Disposal and Plumbing Practices. Retrieved April 23,
2013, from http://water.epa.qov/infrastructure/wastewater/septic/census index.cfm
VandeWeghe, J. R., & Kennedy, C. (2007). A spatial analysis of residential greenhouse gas
emissions in the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area. [Article; Proceedings Paper]. Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 11(2), 133-144.
Vargo, J., Stone, B., & Glanz, K. (2012). Google walkability: A new tool for local planning and
public health research? / Phys. Act. Health Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 9(5), 689-
697.
Vaughan, K. B., Kaczynski, A. T., Wilhelm Stanis, S., Besenyi, G. M., Bergstrom, R., & Heinrich,
K. M. (2013). Exploring the Distribution of Park Availability, Features, and Quality Across
Kansas City, Missouri by Income and Race/Ethnicity: an Environmental Justice Investigation.
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(1), 28-38.
Verburg, P. H., van de Steeg, J., Veldkamp, A., & Willemen, L. (2009). From land cover
change to land function dynamics: A major challenge to improve land characterization.
[Review], Journal of Environmental Management, 90(3), 1327-1335.
Wade, T. J., Calderon, R. L., Brenner, K. P., Sams, E., Beach, M., Haugland, R., et al. (2008).
High sensitivity of children to swim ming-associated gastrointestinal illness - Results using a
rapid assay of recreational water quality. Epidemiology, 19(3).
Wade, T. J., Sams, E., Brenner, K. P., Haugland, R., Chern, E., Beach, M., et al. (2010). Rapidly
measured indicators of recreational water quality and swimming-associated illness at
marine beaches: a prospective cohort study. Environmental Health, 9.
Walch, J. M., Bruce S. Rabin, Richard Day, Jessica N. Williams, Krissy Choi, and James D. Kang.
(2005). The Effect of Sunlight on Postoperative Analgesic Medication Use: A Prospective
Study of Patients Undergoing Spinal Surgery. Psychosomatic Medicine, 67(1), 156-163.
Walters, C. (2012). Assessment of Listening Session Communities for "State of Practice.".
Wang, Y. Q., & Moskovits, D. K. (2001). Tracking fragmentation of natural communities and
changes in land cover: Applications of landsat data for conservation in an urban landscape
(Chicago wilderness). Conservation Biology, 15(4).
D-40
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Wardrop, D. H., Glasmeier, A. K., Peterson-Smith, J., Eckles, D., Ingram, H., & Brooks, R. P.
(2011). Wetland ecosystem services and coupled socioeconomic benefits through
conservation practices in the Appalachian Region. Ecological Applications Ecological
Applications, 21 (spl), S93-S115.
Warren, P. S., Ryan, R. L., Lerman, S. B., & Tooke, K. A. (2011). Social and institutional factors
associated with land use and forest conservation along two urban gradients in
Massachusetts. [Article]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 102(2), 82-92.
Weber, T., Sloan, A., & Wolf, J. (2006). Maryland's Green Infrastructure Assessment:
Development of a comprehensive approach to land conservation. [Article]. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 77(1-2), 94-110.
Weir LA, E. D., Brand DA. (2006). Parents' perceptions of neighborhood safety and children's
physical activity. Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 212-217.
Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress among Rural
Children. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 911-930.
Wernham, A. (2011). Health impact assessments are needed in decision making about
environmental and land-use policy. J. Epidemiol. Community Health Journal of Epidemiology
and Community Health, 65(6), 947-956.
White, K., Haas, J. S., & Williams, D. R. (2012). Elucidating the Role of Place in Health Care
Disparities: The Example of Racial/Ethnic Residential Segregation. Health Services Research,
47(3).
Wilbur, J., Chandler, P., Dancy, B., Choi, J., & Plonczynski, D. (2002). Environmental, Policy,
and Cultural Factors Related to Physical Activity in Urban, African American Women,
[research-article]. Women & Health, 36(2), 17-28.
Wilkinson, R. G., Pickett, K. E., & Vogli, R. D. (2010). Equality, sustainability, and quality of
life. British Medical Journal, 341( c5816), 1138-1140.
Williams, D. R., Kontos, E. Z., Viswanath, K., Haas, J. S., Lathan, C. S., MacConaill, L. E., et al.
(2012). Integrating Multiple Social Statuses in Health Disparities Research: The Case of Lung
Cancer. Health Services Research, 47(3).
Willis, M. R., & Keller, A. A. (2007). A framework for assessing the impact of land use policy
on community exposure to air toxics. Journal of Environmental Management, 83(2), 213-
227.
Wilson, E. H., Hurd, J. D., Civco, D. L., Prisloe, M. P., & Arnold, C. (2003). Development of a
geospatial model to quantify, describe and map urban growth. Remote Sensing of
Environment, 86(3).
D-41
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Wilson, S. M., Heaney, C. D., & Wilson, 0. (2010). Governance Structures and the Lack of
Basic Amenities: Can Community Engagement Be Effectively Used to Address Environmental
Injustice in Underserved Black Communities? [research-article]. Environmental Justice, 3(4),
125-133.
Wilson, S. M., Wilson, 0. R., Heaney, C. D., & Cooper, J. (2007). Use of EPA collaborative
problem-solving model to obtain environmental justice in North Carolina. Progress in
community health partnerships : research, education, and action, 1(4).
Winters, M., Brauer, M., Setton, E. M., &Teschke, K. (2010). Built Environment Influences
on Healthy Transportation Choices: Bicycling versus Driving. Journal of Urban Health-
Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 87(6).
Wolf, K. L. (2003). Social Aspects of Urban Forestry: Public Response to Urban Forest in
Inner-city Business Districts. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry, 29(3), 117-126.
Wolf, K. L. (2004a). Public Value of Nature: Economics of Urban Trees, Parks and Open
Space. Design with Spirit: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Environmental
Design Research Association. Edmond, OK: Environmental Design Research Association.
Wolf, K. L. (2004b). Trees and Business District Preferences: A Case Study of Athens, Georgia,
U.S. Journal of arboriculture., 30(6).
Wolf, K. L. (2008). City Trees, Nature and Physical Activity: A Research Review. Arborist
News.
Wolman, H., Galster, G., Hanson, R., Ratcliffe, M., Furdell, K., & Sarzynski, A. (2005). The
Fundamental Challenge in Measuring Sprawl: Which Land Should Be Considered? [research-
article]. The Professional Geographer, 57(1), 94-105.
Wood, L., Frank, L. D., & Giles-Corti, B. (2010). Sense of community and its relationship with
walking and neighborhood design. Social science & medicine (1982), 70(9).
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future.
Retrieved from http://conspect.nl/pdf/Our Common Future-Brundtland Report ig87.pdf.
World Health Organization, R. O. f. E. (2011). Burden of disease from environmental noise:
Quantification of healthy life years lost in Europe.
Yoder, C. O., & Rankin, E. T. (1996). Assessing the Condition and Status of Aquatic Life
Designated Uses in Urban and Suburban Watersheds. In L. A. Roesner (Ed.), Effects of
Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems. New York, NY: American
Society of Civil Engineers,.
York, A. M., & Munroe, D. K. (2010). Urban encroachment, forest regrowth and land-use
institutions: Does zoning matter?, 27(2), 471-479.
D-42
-------
SHC Land Use Planning
SHC 4.1.2 Final Report
September 2013
Younger, M., Morrow-Almeida, H. R., Vindigni, S. M., & Dannenberg, A. L. (2008). The Built
Environment, Climate Change, and Health Opportunities for Co-Benefits. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 517-526.
Yu, C., & Hien, W. N. (2006). Thermal benefits of city parks. Energy and Buildings, 38(2),
105-120.
Zellner, M. L., Page, S. E., Rand, W., Brown, D. G., Robinson, D. T., Nassauer, J., et al. (2009).
The emergence of zoning policy games in exurban jurisdictions: Informing collective action
theory. 26(2), 356-367.
Zhang, J., & Wang, Y. (2006). A pixel-based method to estimate urban compactness and its
preliminary application. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 27(23-24).
Zhao, M., Kong, Z.-h., Escobedo, F., & Gao, J. (2010). Impacts of urban forests on offsetting
carbon emissions from industrial energy use in Hangzhou, China. Journal of Environmental
Management, 91(4), 807-813.
Zhao, Z., & Kaestner, R. (2010). Effects of urban sprawl on obesity. J Health Econ, 29(6), 779-
787.
Zheng, D., Ducey, M. J., & Heath, L. S. (2013). Assessing net carbon sequestration on urban
and community forests of northern New England, USA. UFUG Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 12(1), 61-68.
Zhou, G., & He, Y. (2007). The influencing factors of urban land expansion in Changsha.
Journal of Geographical Sciences, 17(4).
Zhou, Y., & Levy, J. I. (2007). Factors influencing the spatial extent of mobile source air
pollution impacts: A meta-analysis. [Article]. BMC Public Health, 7.
D-43
-------
Appendix E Journals Cited
-------
Appendix F Resources Consulted
F-l
------- |