Integrating Hazard Mitigation into New Urban and Conventional Developments

The twentieth century model of the sprawling metropolis has fostered a massive build up of highly vulnerable development. New Urbanism has emerged to counter many of the societal ills of sprawl, but there is growing concern about placing this compact urban form in harm's way. Using 33 matched pairs of New Urban and conventional low-density developments we examine how well New Urban developments located in hazardous areas incorporate hazard mitigation techniques. Findings indicate that New Urban developments are compounding the growing risk to hazards by potentially adding higher density development than in the past. We recommend changes in New Urban model codes, and public policy that places more emphasis on mitigation through comprehensive planning.

[1]  R. Burby.  Hurricane Katrina and the Paradoxes of Government Disaster Policy: Bringing About Wise Governmental Decisions for Hazardous Areas , 2006 .

[2]  R. Cervero,et al.  TRAVEL DEMAND AND THE 3DS: DENSITY, DIVERSITY, AND DESIGN , 1997 .

[3]  S. Brody,et al.  Mandating Citizen Participation in Plan Making: Six Strategic Planning Choices , 2003 .

[4]  Philip Berke,et al.  Reducing Natural Hazard Risks Through State Growth Management , 1998 .

[5]  Philip Berke,et al.  What Makes Plan Implementation Successful? An Evaluation of Local Plans and Implementation Practices in New Zealand , 2006 .

[6]  P. Berke.  Enhancing Plan Quality: Evaluating the Role of State Planning Mandates for Natural Hazard Mitigation , 1996 .

[7]  Randall Crane,et al.  Cars and Drivers in the New Suburbs: Linking Access to Travel in Neotraditional Planning , 1994 .

[8]  B. Brown,et al.  New Urban and Standard Suburban Subdivisions: Evaluating Psychological and Social Goals , 2001 .

[9]  E. Talen.  Sense of Community and Neighbourhood Form: An Assessment of the Social Doctrine of New Urbanism , 1999 .

[10]  R. Burby,et al.  Mandates, Plans, and Planners: Building Local Commitment to Development Management , 1994 .

[11]  Glenn E. Moglen,et al.  Limiting Imperviousness , 2007 .

[12]  P. Berke,et al.  Greening Development to Protect Watersheds: Does New Urbanism Make a Difference? , 2003 .

[13]  Michael K. Lindell,et al.  Politics of Hazard Mitigation , 2000 .

[14]  R. Burby.  Making Plans that Matter: Citizen Involvement and Government Action , 2003 .

[15]  Raymond J. Burby,et al.  Improving Compliance with Regulations: Choices and Outcomes for Local Government , 1998 .

[16]  David L. A. Gordon,et al.  Gross Density and New Urbanism: Comparing Conventional and New Urbanist Suburbs in Markham, Ontario , 2005 .

[17]  B. Stone,et al.  Urban Form and Watershed Management: How Zoning Influences Residential Stormwater Volumes , 2006 .

[18]  E. J. Kaiser,et al.  Unleashing the Power of Planning to Create Disaster-Resistant Communities , 1999 .

[19]  S. Brody.  Examining the Effects of Biodiversity on the Ability of Local Plans to Manage Ecological Systems , 2003 .

[20]  J. Sallis,et al.  Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures , 2003, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[21]  Samuel D. Brody,et al.  Measuring the Effects of Stakeholder Participation on the Quality of Local Plans Based on the Principles of Collaborative Ecosystem Management , 2003 .