Aslıgül Göçmen examines the environmental impact of conservation subdivision design.
“Assessing the Environmental Merits of Conservation Subdivision Design” by Z. Aslıgül Göçmen
Between those who extol the virtues of low-density suburban development (e.g. Kotkin, Cox, Gordon) and others who promote Smart Growth strategies (e.g. Talen, Ewing) lies the idea of the conservation subdivision. This policy strategy popularized by Arendt (1996) seeks to reconcile traditional suburban tract development with ecological principles.1 More specifically, conservation subdivision design should promote:“(1) protection of environmentally sensitive and ecologically significant areas within a subdivision, (2) creation of a regional network of such land and open spaces, and (3) less runoff and less pollution in the region’s water resources” (2). Environmental conservation is achieved mostly through the clustering of housing within the subdivision. Using 26 conservation developments paired with 26 traditional suburban developments in Waukesha County, Z. Asilgul Gocmen asks whether those designed as conservation subdivisions under county regulations deliver on their ecological promises and goals.
Building on existing literature, Gocmen analyses whether conservation subdivisions actually does lead to 1) land preservation, 2) a network of interconnected open space, and 3) water quality benefits (through reductions in impervious surfaces). By matching subdivisions by gross density, size, and location, Göçmen isolates the impact of the conservation design through comparison with similar conventional developments.
Several key indicators tested failed to show statistically significant correlations (See Table). That said, “conservation subdivisions protected significantly more land (50 percent) than did conventional subdivisions (11 percent). However, the proportion of land left natural versus mown in these open spaces was similar.” Interviews conducted by the author confirmed that developers and planners do not give formal consideration the ecological values of which open spaces are conserved. Instead, they try to guarantee that there is a minimum of land set-aside.
In terms of water, conservation subdivisions did not have wider riparian buffers and did not decrease impervious surfaces. They did, however, include better designed storm-water retention ponds.
While conservation subdivisions do represent some improvements, they do not as currently practiced in Wisconsin offer a greatly improved environmental model for development.
Given these findings, should planners ask if site-based strategies are appropriate for landscape-scale conservation goals?
SAGE and ACSP have kindly granted access to the full article until 1/21/2014
Follow JPER on Twitter @JPER7
Göçmen, Z. Aslıgül. 2013. Assessing the Environmental Merits of Conservation Subdivision Design.Journal of Planning Education and Research: 0739456X13512526.
Summary by Tom Douthat

Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.

Map: Where Senate Republicans Want to Sell Your Public Lands
For public land advocates, the Senate Republicans’ proposal to sell millions of acres of public land in the West is “the biggest fight of their careers.”

Restaurant Patios Were a Pandemic Win — Why Were They so Hard to Keep?
Social distancing requirements and changes in travel patterns prompted cities to pilot new uses for street and sidewalk space. Then it got complicated.

Platform Pilsner: Vancouver Transit Agency Releases... a Beer?
TransLink will receive a portion of every sale of the four-pack.

Toronto Weighs Cheaper Transit, Parking Hikes for Major Events
Special event rates would take effect during large festivals, sports games and concerts to ‘discourage driving, manage congestion and free up space for transit.”

Berlin to Consider Car-Free Zone Larger Than Manhattan
The area bound by the 22-mile Ringbahn would still allow 12 uses of a private automobile per year per person, and several other exemptions.
Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools
This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.
Planning for Universal Design
Learn the tools for implementing Universal Design in planning regulations.
Heyer Gruel & Associates PA
JM Goldson LLC
Custer County Colorado
City of Camden Redevelopment Agency
City of Astoria
Transportation Research & Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University
Camden Redevelopment Agency
City of Claremont
Municipality of Princeton (NJ)
