You are here:
ASSESSING VULNERABILITIES FROM ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Citation:
MEHAFFEY, M. H., L. WAINGER, T. G. WADE, D. YANKEE, E. R. SMITH, V. BOTT, AND R. YARBOURGH. ASSESSING VULNERABILITIES FROM ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING. Elsevier Science Ltd, New York, NY, 87(1):83-94, (2008).
Impact/Purpose:
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems - by providing ecosystem research and methods development at multiple scales, utilizing landscape ecology and associated techniques
Description:
Planners in a rapidly urbanizing area must take into account trade offs between multiple environmental issues of concern. A 15-county region centered on Charlotte, North Carolina, is experiencing a boom in growth resulting in both air and water quality concerns. In this paper, we examine changes to environmental and socio-economic factors across the region between two contrasting alternative future scenarios of land use development. We compared high and medium density growth scenarios and found that the high density scenario resulted in improved landscape quality in most counties, as measured by a series of metrics. Those counties not demonstrating county level differences between scenarios, Mecklenburg, NC and York, SC, still had several watersheds within each county that were less vulnerable to habitat and water quality impacts under the high density scenario. High density development achieved through creation of distinct urban centers (compact centers scenario) was associated with higher phosphorus and sediment loads in watersheds that contained the urban centers. In contrast, the greater land consumption associated with the medium density scenario consumed nutrientgenerating agricultural lands, resulting in lower nitrogen loading. Increased density was estimated to generate lower expenditures for county governments, but also potentially lower revenues if multi-unit houses are valued at current market rates, leading to overall less favorable fiscal results with the high density scenario for all but the most urbanized county. We found that incorporating spatial dynamics in our assessment of the region provided a way to evaluate future patterns under different alternative growth scenarios. In addition, we found that by using two different reporting units (e.g. regional and local), decisions on where to target development and resources for maximizing benefits to both the economy and environment could be refined.