Smart growth and urban development pattern: A comparative study

被引:88
作者
Song, Y [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Dept City & Reg Planning, Chapel Hill, NC USA
关键词
urban form measures; smart growth; physical planning;
D O I
10.1177/0160017604273854
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This article evaluates the efficacy of smart growth instruments in bringing forth compact urban development and neotraditional neighborhood design. The article first sets forth a set of quantitative measures that operationalize fire dimensions of compact urban development and neotraditional neighborhood design: street network connectivity, density, land use mix, accessibility, and pedestrian walkability. Using these measures, three study areas are evaluated to determine how well their urban development patterns meet smart growth principles. These study areas arc Portland, Oregon; Orange County, Florida; and Montgomery County Maryland. Findings indicate that all three areas have quite similar development patterns. Findings also suggest that smart growth instruments have altered subdivision design, which is a traditional aspect of physical urban planning. However, smart growth plans have not branched out into non-traditional aspects of planning to encourage mixed land uses and to improve regional accessibility.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 265
页数:27
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
*1000 FRIENDS OR, 1991, LUTRAC ALT
[2]  
Allen E, 2001, PLANNING SUPPORT SYS, P229
[3]  
*AM PLAN ASS, 1998, 479 PAS
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Urban Sprawl
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1999, ONCE THERE WERE GREE
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1994, The new urbanism: Toward an architecture of community
[7]  
[Anonymous], [No title captured]
[8]   Are we planning for sustainable development? An evaluation of 30 comprehensive plans [J].
Berke, PR ;
Conroy, MM .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION, 2000, 66 (01) :21-33
[9]  
Daisa J. M., 1998, TRANSPORTATION LAND
[10]   The built environment and human activity patterns: Exploring the impacts of urban form on public health [J].
Frank, LD ;
Engelke, PO .
JOURNAL OF PLANNING LITERATURE, 2001, 16 (02) :202-218