Comparing the attitudes of local residents, planners, and developers about preserving rural character in New England

Abstract Rural areas across North America are experiencing unprecedented residential development that negatively impact the rural character that attracts new residents to these areas in the first place. This study looks at the three groups that influence residential sprawl in rural areas on the urban fringe: planners, homebuilders, and local citizens. This study in rural New England included both written surveys in the form of a photo-questionnaire, as well as interviews with planners and homebuilders about their attitudes toward development and open space preservation and their perceptions of rural character. Scenes of both traditional and innovative rural areas were used to elicit participants’ perceptions about the type of development, which they consider to be compatible with rural New England. The results of the survey showed many similarities between the three groups, but in some cases the “expert” planners revealed a more limited view of compatible development than did either local residents or homebuilders. Furthermore, homebuilders indicated that experimentation with innovative subdivision design was discouraged by current local planning laws. This study has planning implications for those interested in preserving rural character through innovative subdivision design, as well as reveals new insights into what attracts people to move to rural areas.

[1]  William Hollingsworth Whyte,et al.  The Last Landscape , 1970 .

[2]  Keith Halfacree,et al.  Talking about rurality: Social representations of the rural as expressed by residents of six English parishes , 1995 .

[3]  William C Sullivan.  Cluster housing at the rural-urban fringe: The search for adequate and satisfying places to live , 1996 .

[4]  Alun E. Joseph,et al.  Consumer Preferences for Rural Residences: A Conjoint Analysis in Ontario, Canada , 1989 .

[5]  Randall Arendt,et al.  Growing Greener: Putting Conservation Into Local Plans And Ordinances , 1999 .

[6]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective , 1989 .

[7]  Randall Arendt,et al.  Conservation Design for Subdivisions: A Practical Guide To Creating Open Space Networks , 1996 .

[8]  Richard L. Kent,et al.  Scenic routes linking and protecting natural and cultural landscape features : a greenway skeleton , 1995 .

[9]  E. Strumse.  DEMOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES IN THE VISUAL PREFERENCES FOR AGRARIAN LANDSCAPES IN WESTERN NORWAY , 1996 .

[10]  Thomas L. Daniels,et al.  Where Does Cluster Zoning Fit in Farmland Protection , 1997 .

[11]  Earl R. Babbie,et al.  The practice of social research , 1969 .

[12]  Sally Schauman.  Scenic Value of Countryside Landscapes to Local Residents: A Whatcom County, Washington Case Study , 1988, Landscape Journal.

[13]  A. Nelson,et al.  The new 'burbs: the exurbs and their implications for planning policy , 1994 .

[14]  R. Caves,et al.  Planners' Attitude Toward Growth A Comparative Case Study , 1994 .

[15]  Tom Daniels,et al.  Holding Our Ground: Protecting America's Farms And Farmland , 1997 .

[16]  Randall G. Arendt,et al.  Rural by design : maintaining small town character , 1994 .

[17]  Robert L. Ryan,et al.  Preserving rural character in New England: local residents' perceptions of alternative residential development , 2002 .

[18]  Rolf Joseph Pendall,et al.  Do Land-Use Controls Cause Sprawl? , 1999 .

[19]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[20]  J. Km,et al.  The rural rebound revisited. , 1995 .