Conservation Value of Residential Open Space: Designation and Management Language of Florida’s Land Development Regulations
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Sustainable Development and the Conservation of Open Space
Best Practices for Enhancing the Conservation Value of Open Space
3. Methods—Content Analysis of Florida LDRs
3.1. County Selection
3.2. Analyses
4. Results
4.1. Open Space Designation
All Counties | ||
(N = 67) | ||
Open Space Designation (16 items)* | 6.93 (3.14)a | |
1 | Does the ordinance define open space? | 50 (75) |
2 | Does it require the preservation of open space as part of development? | 61 (91) |
3 | Does it require that open space be set aside in a contiguous tract of land? | 11 (16) |
4 | Does it provide incentives for the preservation of open space? | 47 (70) |
5 | Does it identify the type of land that must be included in open space? | 30 (45) |
6 | Does it identify hardscape elements that are not allowed within the open space? | 41 (61) |
7 | Does it identify recreational elements that are allowed within the open space? | 43 (64) |
8 | Does it include a list of permissible activities? | 39 (58) |
9 | Does it include a list of prohibited activities and uses? | 13 (19) |
10 | Does it mention activities that protect open space and natural areas during development? | 17 (25) |
11 | Does it require legal protection of the open space? | 31 (46) |
12 | Does it require that the open-space design connect to existing community-wide open space | 15 (22) |
13 | Does it require design of open space to account for future land use of surrounding areas? | 10 (15) |
14 | Does it prohibit residential structures that abut the natural area? | 8 (12) |
15 | Does it require education for residents about open space? | 1 (1) |
16 | Does it require clear ownership of the open space? | 43 (64) |
Management of Open Space (12 items)* | 2.38 (2.60) a | |
1 | Does it require access to the open space for management? | 6 (9) |
2 | Does it require an open space management plan? | 12 (18) |
3 | Does it require the management plan to identify maintenance objectives? | 4 (6) |
4 | Does it require that changes to the plan be approved by a regulatory entity? | 3 (4) |
5 | Does it require specifics about who will manage the open space? | 31 (46) |
6 | Does it address the consequences of failure to manage by the responsible party? | 4 (6) |
7 | Does it require maintenance efforts in the open space? | 37 (55) |
8 | Does it require an estimate for the costs for maintenance activities? | 2 (3) |
9 | Does it require funding for maintenance in perpetuity? | 11 (16) |
10 | Does it require management efforts that enhance local flora? | 15 (22) |
11 | Does it require management efforts that enhance local fauna? | 9 (13) |
12 | Does it specify a length of time that management activities will continue? | 23 (34) |
Total Policy Score (28 items) | 9.32 (5.17) a |
4.2. Management of Open Space
4.3. County OSI and MI Scores
County Name | Open-Space Index | Management Index | Total Policy Score |
---|---|---|---|
Alachua | 14 | 10 | 24 |
Santa Rosa | 12 | 9 | 21 |
Martin | 11 | 8 | 19 |
Brevard | 11 | 7 | 18 |
Charlotte | 12 | 5 | 17 |
Pasco | 13 | 4 | 17 |
Lee | 9 | 7 | 16 |
Leon | 11 | 5 | 16 |
Hardee | 9 | 5 | 14 |
Orange | 9 | 5 | 14 |
Palm Beach | 8 | 6 | 14 |
Sumter | 10 | 4 | 14 |
Bradford | 10 | 3 | 13 |
Broward | 9 | 4 | 13 |
Gadsden | 10 | 3 | 13 |
Highlands | 10 | 3 | 13 |
Manatee | 7 | 6 | 13 |
Marion | 8 | 5 | 13 |
Polk | 10 | 3 | 13 |
St. Lucie | 4 | 9 | 13 |
Collier | 9 | 3 | 12 |
Indian River | 10 | 2 | 12 |
Monroe | 9 | 3 | 12 |
Jefferson | 9 | 2 | 11 |
Putnam | 8 | 3 | 11 |
Citrus | 9 | 1 | 10 |
Duval | 7 | 3 | 10 |
Franklin | 6 | 4 | 10 |
Gilchrist | 8 | 2 | 10 |
Hillsborough | 8 | 2 | 10 |
Madison | 7 | 3 | 10 |
Seminole | 9 | 1 | 10 |
Columbia | 7 | 2 | 9 |
Flagler | 8 | 1 | 9 |
Nassaub | 7 | 2 | 9 |
Volusia | 8 | 1 | 9 |
Levy | 7 | 1 | 8 |
Liberty | 7 | 1 | 8 |
Suwanneeb | 8 | 0 | 8 |
Calhoun | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DeSoto | 7 | 0 | 7 |
Hamilton | 4 | 3 | 7 |
Lake | 7 | 0 | 7 |
Walton | 7 | 0 | 7 |
Escambia | 4 | 2 | 6 |
Okaloosa | 6 | 0 | 6 |
St. Johns | 4 | 2 | 6 |
Taylor | 6 | 0 | 6 |
Wakulla | 6 | 0 | 6 |
Bakera | 4 | 1 | 5 |
Clay | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Glades | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Holmes | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Lafayetteb | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Pinellas | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Washington | 5 | 0 | 5 |
Osceola | 4 | 0 | 4 |
Gulf | 2 | 1 | 3 |
Hernando | 3 | 0 | 3 |
Sarasota | 3 | 0 | 3 |
Bay | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Okeechobee | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Hendry | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Jacksona | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Dixieb | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Miami-Dade | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Unionb | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5. Discussion
Acknowledgements
References
- Sustainable Cities: Concepts and Strategies for Eco-City Development; Walter, B. (Ed.) Eco-Home Media: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1992.
- Burchell, R.W.; Shad, N.A. A natural perspective on land use policy alternatives and consequences. In Proceedings of the National Public Policy Education Conference, Clackamas, OR, USA, 20–24 September 1998.
- Austin, M.E. Resident perspectives of the open space conservation subdivision in Hamburg Township, Michigan. Landscape Urban Plann. 2004, 69, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeman, A.; Hilliker, M.; Koles, M.; Marcouiller, D. Ensuring Open Space: An Assessment of Factors that Explain State-Sponsored Land Protection Programs; Working Paper 3-1; Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin-Madison: Madison, WI, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Kollin, C. Building Greener, Building Smarter: The Winds of Change are Blowing through the Building Community, Fueled by Consumer Demand and Discerning Practitioners; American Forests: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- United States Census Bureau. US Census Bureau Population Projections. Available online: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html (accessed on 15 July 2008).
- Resource efficiency in the built environment. In Proceedings of the Florida Sustainable Communities Summit, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 8 February 2005; Audubon International: New York, NY, USA, 2005.
- Brody, S.D.; Highfield, W.E. Does planning work: Testing the implementation of local environmental planning in Florida. J. Amer. Plann. Assn. 2005, 71, 159–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carriker, R.R. Florida’s Growth Management Act: An Introduction and Overview; EDIS Document FE643; Food and Resource Economics Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Florida Legislature. The 2009 Florida Statutes. Available online: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes (accessed on 29 January 2010).
- Arendt, R. Growing Greener: Putting Conservation into Local Plans and Ordinances; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Hostetler, M.; Drake, D. Conservation subdivisions: A wildlife perspective. Landscape Urban Plann. 2009, 90, 95–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenth, B.A.; Knight, R.L.; Gilgert, W.C. Conservation value of clustered housing developments. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20, 1445–1456. [Google Scholar]
- Hostetler, M.E.; Jones, P.; Dukes, M.; Knowles, H.; Acomb, G.; Clark, M. With one stroke of the pen: How can extension professionals involve developers & policymakers in creating sustainable communities? J. Ext. 2008, 46. No. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Noiseux, K.; Hostetler, M.E. Do homebuyers want green features in their communities? Environ. Behave. 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Youngentob, K.; Hostetler, M. Is a new urban development model building greener communities? Environ. Behave. 2005, 37, 731–759. [Google Scholar]
- Westover, P. Managing Conservation Land: The Stewardship of Conservation Areas, Wildlife Sanctuaries, and Open Space in Massachusetts; Society of Municipal Conservation Professionals: Belmont, MA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, A.; Uncapher, J.L.; McManigal, L.; Lovins, L.H.; Cureton, M.; Browning, W.D. Green Development: Integrating Ecology and Real Estate; John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Romero, M.; Hostetler, M.E. Policies that Address Sustainable Site Development; University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA, 2007; CIR1520. [Google Scholar]
- Milder, J.C.; Lassoie, J.P.; Bedford, B.L. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem function through limited development: An empirical evaluation. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Odell, E.A.; Theobald, D.M.; Knight, R.L. Incorporating ecology into land use planning: The Songbirds’ case for clustered development. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2003, 69, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Theobald, D.M.; Miller, J.R.; Hobbs, N.T. Estimating the cumulative effects of development on wildlife habitat. Landscape Urban Plann. 1997, 39, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Policies for Implementation; Smart Growth Network: Washington, DC, USA, 2002.
- Lichtenberg, E.; Tra, C.; Hardie, I. Land use regulation and the provision of open space in suburban residential subdivisions. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 2007, 54, 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichert, A.K.; Liang, H. An economic analysis of real estate conservation subdivision developments. Appraisal J. 2007, 75, 236–245. [Google Scholar]
- Wenger, S.; Fowler, L. Community Choices Toolkit: Conservation Subdivisions; Atlanta Regional Commission and Georgia Department of Community Affairs: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Marzluff, J.M. Restoration of fragmented landscapes for the conservation of birds: A general framework and specific recommendations for urbanizing landscapes. Restor. Ecol. 2001, 9, 280–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milder, J.C. A framework for understanding conservation development and its ecological implications. Bioscience 2007, 57, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perlman, D.L.; Milder, J.C. Practical Ecology for Planners, Developers, and Citizens; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Luttik, J. The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in The Netherlands. Landscape Urban Plann. 2000, 48, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Land Vote 2001: Americans Invest in Parks and Open Space; The Trust for Public Land: San Francisco, CA, USA; Land Trust Alliance: Washington, DC, USA, 2001.
- Lacy, J. An Examination of Market Appreciation for Clustered Housing with Permanent Open Space; University of Massachusetts-Amherst: Amherst, MA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Gilroy, L. Conservation Design: A Market-Friendly Approach to Local Environmental Protection; Reason Foundation: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Mohamed, R. The economics of conservation subdivisions: Price premiums, improvement costs, and absorption rates. Urban Aff. Rev. 2006, 41, 376–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peck, S. Planning for Biodiversity: Issues and Examples; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, R.H. Overcoming barriers to ecologically sensitive land management: Conservation subdivisions, green developments, and the development of a land ethic. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2004, 24, 141–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ecosystems of Florida; Meyers, R.L.; Ewel, J.J. (Eds.) University of Florida Press: Orlando, FL, USA, 1990.
- Arendt, R. Conservation Design for Subdivisions: A Practical Guide to Creating Open Space Networks; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Arendt, R. Linked landscapes: Creating greenway corridors through conservation subdivision design strategies in the northeastern and central United States. Landscape Urban Plann. 2004, 68, 241–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Culliney, T.W. Benefits of classical biological control for managing invasive plants. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2005, 2, 131–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feiock, R.C.; Tavares, A. County government institutions and local land regulation. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Analysis of Urban Land Markets and the Impact of Land Market Regulation, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, USA, July 2002.
- Golgowski, G.; Harmony Florida, Osceola County, FL, USA. Personal communication, 2006.
- Municipal Code Corporation Municode Library Homepage. http://www.municode.com/Library/library.aspx (accessed on 28 February 2010).
- Riffe, D.; Lacy, A.F. Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research; Laurence Erlbaum Associates: Mahway, NJ, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Holsti, O.R. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1969. [Google Scholar]
- Agresti, A.; Finlay, B. Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Hayes, A.F.; Krippendorf, K. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Commun. Method. Measure. 2007, 1, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berke, P.R.; Conroy, M.M. Are we planning for sustainable development? J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2000, 66, 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hostetler, M.E. Beyond design: The importance of construction and post-construction phases in green developments. Sustainability 2010, 2, 1128–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, J.R.; Hobbs, N.T. Recreational trails, human activity, and nest predation in lowland riparian areas. Landscape Urban Plann. 2000, 50, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, P.J.; Bentley, A.J.; Ansell, R.J.; Harris, S. Impact of predation by domestic cats Felis catus in an urban area. Mammal Rev. 2005, 35, 302–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pimentel, D.; McNair, S.; Janecka, J.; Wightman, J.; Simmonds, C.; O’Connell, C.; Wong, E.; Russel, L.; Zern, J.; Aquino, T.; Tsomondo, T. Economic and environmental threats of alien plant, animal, and microbe invasions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2001, 84, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hostetler, M.E.; Duncan, S.; Paul, J. Post-construction effects of an urban development on migrating, resident, and wintering birds. Southeast. Nat. 2005, 4, 421–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hostetler, M.E. Evaluating Green Communities: Top Eleven Questions to Ask; Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Hostetler, M.; Swiman, E.; Prizzia, A.; Noiseux, K. Reaching residents of green communities: Evaluation of a unique environmental education program. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2008, 7, 114–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gyourko, J.; Rybczynski, W. Financing new urbanism projects: Obstacles and solutions. Housing Policy Debate 2000, 11, 733–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, D.W. Infrastructure planning and sustainable development. J. Urban Plan. Dev.-Asce. 1996, 122, 111–117. [Google Scholar]
- Pendall, R. Do land-use controls cause sprawl? Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Design 1999, 16, 555–571. [Google Scholar]
© 2010 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an Open Access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Wald, D.M.; Hostetler, M.E. Conservation Value of Residential Open Space: Designation and Management Language of Florida’s Land Development Regulations. Sustainability 2010, 2, 1536-1552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2061536
Wald DM, Hostetler ME. Conservation Value of Residential Open Space: Designation and Management Language of Florida’s Land Development Regulations. Sustainability. 2010; 2(6):1536-1552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2061536
Chicago/Turabian StyleWald, Dara M., and Mark E. Hostetler. 2010. "Conservation Value of Residential Open Space: Designation and Management Language of Florida’s Land Development Regulations" Sustainability 2, no. 6: 1536-1552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2061536