Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Conservation subdivision design has been posited to have several ecological benefits; however, the degree to which conservation subdivisions have achieved these benefits has received little empirical evidence. With the use of spatial and statistical analysis, this study investigates land preservation characteristics in fifty-four Waukesha County, Wisconsin, conservation subdivisions. Additional comparative analysis is performed with twenty-six paired conventional subdivisions. The study finds that while conservation subdivisions protected around 2,500 acres of land and helped create an interconnected network of open spaces, they also created large impervious surfaces and fragmented wildlife habitats and other natural resources. Implications for environmental sustainability are discussed.

Keywords

open space conservation subdivisions land preservation sustainability environmental impacts spatial analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Farmland Trust. 2010. “America Has Lost More Than Twenty-Three Million Acres of Agricultural Land.” http://www.farmland.org/news/pressreleases/America-Has-Lost-23-million-acres-of-farmland.asp (accessed January 8, 2011).

Arendt

2004. “Linked Landscapes: Creating Greenway Corridors through Conservation Subdivision Design Strategies in the Northeastern and Central United States.” Landscape and Urban Planning 68:241–69.

Arendt

R. G.

1996. Conservation Design for Subdivisions: A Practical Guide for Creating Open Space Networks. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Arendt

R. G.

1999. Growing Greener: Putting Conservation into Local Plans and Ordinances. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Arnold

C. L.

Jr. Gibbons.

J. C.

1996. “Impervious Surface Coverage: The Emergence of a Key Environmental Indicator.” Journal of the American Planning Association 62 (2): 243–58.

Austin

M. E.

Kaplan.

2003. “Resident Involvement in Natural Resource Management: Open Space Conservation Design in Practice.” Local Environment 8 (2): 141–53.

Beier

Noss.

R. F.

1998. “Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity?” Conservation Biology 12 (6): 1241–52.

Bosworth

2007. “Conservation Subdivision Design: Perceptions and Reality.” Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Brabec

2001. “An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Cluster Development in the Town of Southampton, New York.” Urban Ecosystems 4:27–47.

10.

Brander

K. E.

Owen

K. E.

Potter

K. W.

2004. “Modeled Impacts of Development Type on Runoff Volume and Infiltration Performance.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association 40 (4): 961–69.

11.

Carter

2009. “Developing Conservation Subdivisions: Ecological Constraints, Regulatory Barriers, and Market Incentives.” Landscape and Urban Planning 92:117–24.

12.

City of Olympia. 1995. “Impervious Surface Reduction Study.” Final Report. http://www.ci.olympia.wa.us/~/media/Files/PublicWorks/PDFs/WaterResources/Impervious-Surface-Reduction-Study-1995-072407.ashx (accessed September 22, 2008).

13.

Daniels

1997. “Where Does Cluster Zoning Fit into Farmland Preservation?” Journal of the American Planning Association 63 (1): 129–37.

14.

Falcy

M. R.

Estades

C. F.

2007. “Effectiveness of Corridors Relative to Enlargement of Habitat Patches.” Conservation Biology 21 (5): 1341–46.

15.

Forman

R. T. T.

1995. “Some General Principles of Landscape and Regional Ecology.” Landscape Ecology 10 (3): 133–42.

16.

Girling

Kellett

2002. “Comparing Stormwater Impacts and Costs on Three Neighborhood Plan Types.” Landscape Journal 21:100–109.

17.

Gonzalez-Abraham

Radeloff

Hawbaker

Hammer

Stewart

Clayton.

2007. “Patterns of Houses and Habitat Loss from 1937 to 1999 in Northeast Wisconsin, USA.” Ecological Applications 117:2011–23.

18.

Göçmen

Z. A.

2013. “Barriers to Successful Implementation of Conservation Subdivision Design: A Closer Look at Land Use Regulations and Subdivision Permitting Process.” Landscape and Urban Planning 110:123–33.

19.

Hostetler

2010. “Beyond Design: The Importance of Construction and Post-construction Phases in Green Developments.” Sustainability 2 (4): 1128–37.

20.

Hostetler

Drake.

2009. “Conservation Subdivisions: A Wildlife Perspective.” Landscape and Urban Planning 90:95–101.

21.

Kaplan

Austin

M. E.

Kaplan

2004. “Open Space Communities: Resident Perceptions, Nature Benefits, and Problems with Terminology.” Journal of the American Planning Association 70 (3): 300–12.

22.

Lenth

B. A.

Knight

R. L.

Gilbert.

W. C.

2006. “Conservation Value of Clustered Housing Developments.” Conservation Biology 5:1445–56.

23.

Martin

1999. “Builders Press on in Wisconsin Cow Country.” The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/17/realestate/builders-press-on-in-wisconsin-cow-country.html?pagewanted=all (accessed July 14, 2009).

24.

Milder

J. C.

Clark

2011. “Conservation Development Practices, Extent, and Land Use Effects in the United States.” Conservation Biology 25 (4): 697–707.

25.

Nassauer

J. I.

Allan

J. D.

Johengen

Kosek

S. E.

Infante

2004. “Exurban Residential Subdivision Development: Effects on Water Quality and Public Perception.” Urban Ecosystems 7 (3): 267–81.

26.

NEMO (Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials). 1999. “Conservation Subdivisions: A Better Way to Protect Water Quality, Retain Wildlife, and Preserve Rural Character.” NEMO Project Fact Sheet 9. A Joint Publication of Conn Cooperative Extension’s NEMO project and the Natural Lands Trust.

27.

Odell

E. A.

Theobald

Knight

R. L.

2003. “Incorporating Ecology into Land Use Planning: The Songbirds Case for Clustered Development.” Journal of the American Planning Association 69 (1): 72–82.

28.

Pejchar

Morgan

P. M.

Caldwell

M. R.

Palmer

Daily

G. C.

2007. “Evaluating the Potential for Conservation Development: Biophysical, Economic, and Institutional Perspectives.” Conservation Biology 21 (1): 69–78.

29.

Rosenberg

D. K.

Noon

B. R.

Meslow

E. C.

1997. “Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy.” BioScience 47 (10): 677–87.

30.

Rubin

B. P.

Emmerich.

G. H.

(n.d.). “Refining the Delineation of Environmental Corridors in Southeastern Wisconsin.” http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPCFiles/LandUse/LandUseData/TechnicalRecords/delineation_environmental_corridors.pdf (accessed December 17, 2012).

31.

Schueler

1994. “The Importance of Imperviousness.” Watershed Protection Techniques 1 (3): 100–11.

32.

SEWRPC. 1992. A Regional Land Use Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin–2010. Waukesha, WI: SEWRPC.

33.

SEWRPC. 1997. “A Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species Habitat Protection and Management Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin.” http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPCFiles/Publications/pr/pr-042_nat_areas_critical_species_habitat_protection_management_plan.pdf (accessed December 17, 2012).

34.

SEWRPC. 2003. “Summary of Wisconsin Comprehensive Planning Requirements.” http://www.sewrpc.org/smartgrowth/pdfs/wi_comprehensive_planning_req.pdf (accessed March 30, 2006).

35.

SEWRPC. 2005. “Conservation Subdivision Design.” http://www.sewrpc.org/communityassistance/conservationsubdivisions (accessed May 12, 2006).

36.

SEWRPC. 2006. “2035 Regional Land Use Plan.” http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPC/LandUse/2035RegionalLandUsePlan.htm (accessed August 10, 2011).

37.

SEWRPC. (n.d.-a). “Environmental Corridors.” http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPC/LandUse/EnvironmentalCorridors.htm (accessed October 15, 2012).

38.

SEWRPC. (n.d.-b). “Fact Sheet: Sanitary Sewer Service Area Plan Amendment Process.” http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPCFiles/LandUse/LandUseData/SanitarySewerServiceAreas/amendment_process_fact_sheet.pdf (accessed June 5, 2013).

39.

SEWRPC. (n.d.-c). “Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Service Areas.”http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPC/LandUse/SanitarySewerandWaterSupplySer.htm (accessed June 5, 2013).

40.

Taylor

J. J.

Brown

D. G.

Larsen.

2007. “Preserving Natural Features: A GIS-Based Evaluation of a Local Open-Space Ordinance.” Landscape and Urban Planning 82:1–16.

41.

The Sustainable Sites Initiative: Guidelines and Performance Benchmarks 2009. (n.d.) http://www.sustainablesites.org/report/ (accessed July 27, 2011).

42.

Thompson

R. H.

2004. “Overcoming Barriers to Ecologically Sensitive Land Management: Conservation Subdivisions, Green Developments, and the Development of a Land Ethic.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 24:141–53.

43.

U.S. Census Bureau. ( n.d.). Retrieved on September 6, 2009, and August 9, 2011, from http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en.

44.

USDA. The Census of Agriculture. (n.d.). http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_County_Level/Wisconsin/index.asp (accessed February 23, 2010).

45.

USDC Bureau of the Census. 1988. 1987 Census of Agriculture. Washington, DC.

46.

U.S. Green Building Council. (n.d.). “LEED 2009 for Neighborhood Development Rating System.” http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=148 (accessed July 27, 2011).

47.

Waukesha County. 2011. “Waukesha County Farmland Preservation Plan.” http://www.waukeshacounty.gov/defaultwc.aspx?id=39405 (accessed November 19, 2012).

48.

Waukesha County (n.d.). http://www.waukeshacounty.gov/ (accessed July 14, 2009).

49.

Williams

Wise.

2006. “Hydrologic Impacts of Alternative Approaches to Storm Water Management and Land Development.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association 42:443–55.

50.

Wisconsin Comprehensive Planning Law. (1999). Chapter in Wisconsin Statutes, s.66.1001.

51.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2009. “Shoreland Zoning Minimum Standards.” http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/dsfm/shore/standards.htm (accessed January 4, 2010).

Assessing the Environmental Merits of Conservation Subdivision Design

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References