DOCSLIB.ORG

Impacts of Changing Land Use

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impacts of Changing Land Use State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference 1996 Background Paper IMPACTS OF CHANGING LAND USE Steve Thorp Great Lakes Commission Ann Arbor, Michigan Ray Rivers Environment Canada Burlington, Ontario Victoria Pebbles Great Lakes Commission Ann Arbor, Michigan October 1997 ISBN 0-662-26034-1 EPA 905-R-97-015d Cat. No. En40-11/35-4-1997E ii Impacts of Changing Land Use—SOLEC 96 SOLEC 96—Impacts of Changing Land Use iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments ................................................................ vi 1.0 Overview, Findings, and Conclusions ............................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................ 1 1.2 Brief History of Land Use .................................................. 2 1.3 Trends in Land Use ...................................................... 3 1.3.1 Urban and Rural Development Land Uses .............................. 3 1.3.2 Industrial Land Uses .............................................. 4 1.3.3 Agricultural Land Uses ............................................ 6 1.4 Land-Use Concerns ...................................................... 7 1.4.1 Nearshore Development ........................................... 7 1.4.2 Urban Sprawl ................................................... 7 1.4.3 Brownfields .................................................... 8 1.4.4 Conversion of Farmland ........................................... 8 1.4.5 Local Land-Use Decisions and Regional Impact ......................... 9 1.4.6 “Hardening” of the Landscape and Stream Degradation .................... 9 1.4.7 Auto and Truck Transportation ..................................... 10 1.4.8 Agricultural Land Management ..................................... 10 1.5 Indicators ............................................................. 11 1.6 Findings and Conclusions ................................................. 13 2.0 Land Use and Its Impacts ....................................................... 14 2.1 Development .......................................................... 14 2.1.1 Coastal Population and Development ................................. 15 2.1.2 The Advancing Urban Frontier ..................................... 16 2.2 The Trend to Sprawl ..................................................... 17 2.2.1 Land-Use Planning .............................................. 18 2.3 Changing Urban Structure and the Benefits of Renewal ........................... 20 2.3.1 Changing Urban Structure ......................................... 20 2.3.2 The Economics of Urban Form ..................................... 22 2.3.3 Industrial Restructuring and Industry Relocation ........................ 22 2.3.4 The Benefits of Renewal .......................................... 23 2.4 Industrial and Municipal Activity ........................................... 24 2.4.1 Wastewater and Stormwater Treatment Discharges ...................... 25 2.4.2 Industrial Water Use and Discharges ................................. 26 2.4.3 Air Discharges ................................................. 27 2.4.4 Opportunities and Challenges ...................................... 27 2.5 Transportation ......................................................... 28 2.5.1 Pollution Issues and Solutions ...................................... 29 2.6 Agriculture ............................................................ 31 2.6.1 Soil Erosion and Sedimentation ..................................... 32 iv Impacts of Changing Land Use—SOLEC 96 2.6.2 Pesticide Use ................................................... 33 2.6.3 Manure Management ............................................ 33 3.0 Lake By Lake Perspective ....................................................... 34 3.1 Hydrologic and Natural Features ........................................... 34 3.2 Land Use ............................................................. 37 3.3 Land Use Trends and Their Impacts ......................................... 39 3.4 Key Future Issues ....................................................... 47 4.0 Case Studies of Best Practices, Trends, and Issues ..................................... 50 4.1 Farmland Conversion: A Major Issue for the Basin .............................. 50 4.2 Planning for Sustainable Growth in Cottage Country: Tay Township ................. 53 4.3 Dredging and Confined Disposal Facilities .................................... 56 4.4 Redevelopment of Cobourg Harbourfront ..................................... 63 4.5 Watershed-based Planning and Innovative Land Use in Northwest Michigan ........... 65 4.6 Planning North Aldershot Development ....................................... 71 5.0 Land-Use Planning Across the Border .............................................. 74 5.1 Binational ............................................................. 74 5.2 United States .......................................................... 75 5.2.1 The Framework ................................................. 75 5.2.2 Planning Roles and Responsibilities .................................. 80 5.2.3 Tools and Techniques ............................................ 84 5.3 Canada ............................................................... 91 5.3.1 The Framework ................................................. 91 5.3.2 Planning Roles and Responsibilities .................................. 94 5.3.3 Tools and Techniques ........................................... 101 5.4 Conclusions .......................................................... 104 5.4.1 Background .................................................. 104 5.4.2 Extending the Tool Kit .......................................... 104 5.4.3 The Challenge for the Future ...................................... 105 6.0 References ................................................................. 107 List of Figures Figure 1. Land Use in the Great Lakes Basin ............................................. 1 Figure 2. The Five Individual Lake Basins of the Great Lakes Basin .......................... 34 Figure 3. Land Use and Urban Buffer Zones in the Great Lakes Basin ......................... 53 Figure 4. Township of Tay Shoreline Cottage Growth ..................................... 55 Figure 5. Location of Confined Disposal Facilities (CDF) US Great Lakes ..................... 58 SOLEC 96—Impacts of Changing Land Use v List of Tables Table 1. Land-Use Indicators ....................................................... 12 Table 2. Land Needed for Sprawl and Central Forms of Development, Greater Toronto Area 2021 ... 21 Table 3. Potential Benefits of Restoration and Renewal for Areas of Concern (1991 and 93 values) ... 24 Table 4. Great Lakes Basin Land And Water Areas and Populations .......................... 37 Table 5. Farming Intensity in the Great Lakes Basin ...................................... 43 Table 6. Percent Changes in Agricultural Land Use Between 1981/82 and 1991/92 ............... 45 vi Impacts of Changing Land Use—SOLEC 96 Acknowledgments This paper is the product of a collaborative effort. Its several principal authors developed the format, contributed text, and coordinated the efforts of the many contributing authors. The project management team consisted of Mike Donahue and Steve Thorp, Great Lakes Commission; and Ray Rivers, Environment Canada. All the authors express their thanks to the many reviewers for their comments and suggestions. Principal Authors Victoria Pebbles, Program Specialist Ray Rivers, Senior Economist Transportation and Economic Development, Environment Canada, Ontario Region Great Lakes Commission Steve Thorp, Program Manager Transportation and Economic Development, Great Lakes Commission Contributing Authors Paula Arvo and Jake VanderWal Gregg Bluth Lake Superior Programs Office, Michigan Technological University Environment Canada Jim Bredin John Barr Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Nick Close Suzanne Barrett Ontario Ministry of Transportation Waterfront Regeneration Trust (Toronto) Peter Croskery and Associates (Grimsby, Tony Wagner Ontario) Waterfront Regeneration Trust (Toronto) Wesley Crown Judith E. Beauty C.P.G. Township of Tay (Ontario) Indiana Department of Natural Resources Leo DeLoyde Ian Bender City of Burlington County of Simcoe (Ontario) Dick Draper Pamela Blais New York State Department of Environmental Metropole Consultants (Toronto) Conservation SOLEC 96—Impacts of Changing Land Use vii Jim Ford Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission Carol Johnston Natural Resources Research Institute (Minnesota) Blair Orr Michigan Technological University Larry Schut Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Keith Sherman, Judi Barnes, Peter Templin, and Dr. Gary Westlake Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy Janet Silbernagel Washington State University Heather Stanworth and Don Greer Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wayne Warren Ohio Department of Natural Resources viii Impacts of Changing Land Use—SOLEC 96 Notice To Readers This Background Paper is one of a series of such papers that were prepared to provide a concise overview of the status of the nearshore conditions in the Great Lakes. The information they present has been selected as representative of the much greater volume of data. They therefore do not present all research or monitoring information available. The Papers were prepared with input from many individuals representing diverse sectors of society. The Papers provided the basis for discussion
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Land-Use, Land-Cover Changes and Biodiversity Loss - Helena Freitas
    LAND USE, LAND COVER AND SOIL SCIENCES – Vol. I - Land-Use, Land-Cover Changes and Biodiversity Loss - Helena Freitas LAND-USE, LAND-COVER CHANGES AND BIODIVERSITY LOSS Helena Freitas University of Coimbra, Portugal Keywords: land use; habitat fragmentation; biodiversity loss Contents 1. Introduction 2. Primary Causes of Biodiversity Loss 2.1. Habitat Degradation and Destruction 2.2. Habitat Fragmentation 2.3. Global Climate Change 3. Strategies for Biodiversity Conservation 3.1. General 3.2. The European Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 4. Conclusions Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary During Earth's history, species extinction has probably been caused by modifications of the physical environment after impacts such as meteorites or volcanic activity. On the contrary, the actual extinction of species is mainly a result of human activities, namely any form of land use that causes the conversion of vast areas to settlement, agriculture, and forestry, resulting in habitat destruction, degradation, and fragmentation, which are among the most important causes of species decline and extinction. The loss of biodiversity is unique among the major anthropogenic changes because it is irreversible. The importance of preserving biodiversity has increased in recent times. The global recognition of the alarming loss of biodiversity and the acceptance of its value resultedUNESCO in the Convention on Biologi – calEOLSS Diversity. In addition, in Europe, the challenge is also the implementation of the European strategy for biodiversity conservation and agricultural policies, though it is increasingly recognized that the strategy is limitedSAMPLE by a lack of basic ecological CHAPTERS information and indicators available to decision makers and end users. We have reached a point where we can save biodiversity only by saving the biosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • UNU-IAS Policy Report
    UNU-IAS Policy Report Cities, Biodiversity and Governance: Perspectives and Challenges of the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity at the City Level The United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) is a global think tank whose mission is “to advance knowledge and promote learning for policy-making to meet the challenges of sustainable development”. UNU-IAS undertakes research and postgraduate education to identify and address strategic issues of concern for all humankind, for governments, decision-makers, and particularly, for developing countries. Established in 1996, the Institute convenes expertise from disciplines such as economics, law, social and natural sciences to better understand and contribute creative solutions to pressing global concerns, with research and programmatic activities related to current debates on sustainable development: . Biodiplomacy Initiative . Ecosystem Services Assessment . Satoyama Initiative . Sustainable Development Governance . Education for Sustainable Development . Marine Governance . Traditional Knowledge Initiative . Science and Technology for Sustainable Societies . Sustainable Urban Futures UNU-IAS, based in Yokohama, Japan, has two International Operating Units: the Operating Unit Ishikawa/Kanazawa (OUIK) in Japan, and the Traditional Knowledge Initiative (TKI) in Australia. UNU-IAS Policy Report Cities, Biodiversity and Governance: Perspectives and Challenges of the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity at the City Level Jose Antonio
    [Show full text]
  • Land Policy and Urbanization in the People's Republic of China
    ADBI Working Paper Series LAND POLICY AND URBANIZATION IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Li Zhang and Xianxiang Xu No. 614 November 2016 Asian Development Bank Institute Li Zhang is an associate professor at the International School of Business & Finance, Sun Yat-sen University. Xianxiang Xu is a professor at the Lingnan College, Sun Yat-sen University. The views expressed in this paper are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of ADBI, ADB, its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADBI does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms. Working papers are subject to formal revision and correction before they are finalized and considered published. The Working Paper series is a continuation of the formerly named Discussion Paper series; the numbering of the papers continued without interruption or change. ADBI’s working papers reflect initial ideas on a topic and are posted online for discussion. ADBI encourages readers to post their comments on the main page for each working paper (given in the citation below). Some working papers may develop into other forms of publication. Suggested citation: Zhang, L., and X. Xu. 2016. Land Policy and Urbanization in the People’s Republic of China. ADBI Working Paper 614. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute. Available: https://www.adb.org/publications/land-policy-and-urbanization-prc Please contact the authors for information about this paper. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Unless otherwise stated, figures and tables without explicit sources were prepared by the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Urban Land Expansion and Implications for Global Croplands
    Future urban land expansion and implications for SPECIAL FEATURE global croplands Christopher Bren d’Amoura,b, Femke Reitsmac, Giovanni Baiocchid, Stephan Barthele,f, Burak Güneralpg, Karl-Heinz Erbh, Helmut Haberlh, Felix Creutziga,b,1, and Karen C. Setoi aMercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, 10829 Berlin, Germany; bDepartment Economics of Climate Change, Technische Universität Berlin, 10623 Berlin, Germany; cDepartment of Geography,Canterbury University, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand; dDepartment of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742; eDepartment of the Built Environment, University of Gävle, SE-80176 Gävle, Sweden; fStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden; gCenter for Geospatial Science, Applications and Technology (GEOSAT), Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843; hInstitute of Social Ecology Vienna, Alpen-Adria Universitaet Klagenfurt, 1070 Vienna, Austria; and iYale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511 Edited by Jay S. Golden, Duke University, Durham, NC, and accepted by Editorial Board Member B. L. Turner November 29, 2016 (received for review June 19, 2016) Urban expansion often occurs on croplands. However, there is little India, and other countries (7–9). Although cropland loss has scientific understanding of how global patterns of future urban become a significant concern in terms of food production and expansion will affect the world’s cultivated areas. Here, we combine livelihoods (10) for many countries, there is very little scientific spatially explicit projections of urban expansion with datasets on understanding of how future urban expansion and especially global croplands and crop yields. Our results show that urban ex- growth of MURs will affect croplands.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Strategy Planning in a Sustainable Development Context
    BiodiversityBiodiversity StrategyStrategy PlanningPlanning inin aa SustainableSustainable DevelopmentDevelopment ContextContext • PLANNING GUIDE • BIODIVERSITY PLANNING MATRIX • NATIONAL CASE STUDIES • SYNERGY BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS UNEP Forthcoming Biodiversity Strategy Planning in a Sustainable Development Context Jacques Prescott Benoît Gauthier Jonas Nagahuedi Mbongu Sodi Institut de l’énergie et de l’environnement de la Francophonie (IEPF) Ministère de l’Environnement du Québec United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) September 2000 PRODUCTION TEAM ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: Jacques Prescott, M. Sc. The publication of this paper was made possible by Direction du patrimoine écologique the financial assistance of the United Nations et du développement durable Development Programme’s Biodiversity Planning Ministère de l’Environnement du Québec Support Programme, United Nations Environment Benoît Gauthier, Ph. D. Programme’s, the Institut de l’énergie et de l’envi- Direction du patrimoine écologique ronnement de la Francophonie and the Ministère de et du développement durable l’Environnement du Québec. The authors wish to Ministère de l’Environnement du Québec thank all those who have contributed to the deve- Jonas Nagahuedi Mbongu Sodi, Ph. D. lopment of this document with their comments and Coordinator of the Convention suggestions with a special consideration for the on Biological Diversity national planning teams that have used the proposed Democratic Republic of Congo methodology
    [Show full text]
  • Land Consumption and Land Take: Enhancing Conceptual Clarity for Evaluating Spatial Governance in the EU Context
    sustainability Article Land Consumption and Land Take: Enhancing Conceptual Clarity for Evaluating Spatial Governance in the EU Context Elisabeth Marquard 1,* , Stephan Bartke 1 , Judith Gifreu i Font 2 , Alois Humer 3 , Arend Jonkman 4 , Evelin Jürgenson 5, Naja Marot 6, Lien Poelmans 7 , Blaž Repe 8 , Robert Rybski 9, Christoph Schröter-Schlaack 1, Jaroslava Sobocká 10, Michael Tophøj Sørensen 11 , Eliška Vejchodská 12,13 , Athena Yiannakou 14 and Jana Bovet 15 1 Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research—UFZ, Department of Economics, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany; [email protected] (S.B.); [email protected] (C.S.-S.) 2 Faculty of Law, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected] 3 Department of Geography and Regional Research, University of Vienna, Universitaetsstrasse 7/5, 1010 Vienna, Austria; [email protected] 4 Department of Management in the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Julianalaan 134, 2628BL Delft, The Netherlands; [email protected] 5 Chair of Geomatics, Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, Estonia; [email protected] 6 Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Ljubljana, Jamnikarjeva ulica 101, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; [email protected] 7 VITO—Vlaamse Instelling voor Technologisch Onderzoek, Unit Ruimtelijke Milieuaspecten, Boeretang 200, 2400 Mol, Belgium; [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Land Degradation Knowledge Base: Policy, Concepts and Data
    ETC/ULS Report | 01/2019 Land degradation knowledge base: policy, concepts and data ISBN 978-3-200-06666-3 Authors: Authors: EvaEva Ivits Ivits (EEA (EEA),), Simone Simone Verzandvoort, Verzandvoort, Rudi Hessel,Rudi Hessel, Henk Wösten Henk Wösten (Wageningen Env. Research(Wageningen), Gergely Env. Tóth Research (Hungarian), Gergely Academy Tóth of Sciences),(Hungarian Mélanie Academy Weynants, of Michiel CherletSciences), (JRC) Mélanie, Stépha nieWeynants, Horion (Univ. Michiel of Copenhagen) Cherlet (JRC), Gergely, Stépha Mauchanie Horion (Lechner Non- profit(Univ. Ltd of), Copenhagen)Gundula Prokop, Gergely (Environment Maucha Agency (Lechner Austria), non Mirko-profit Gregor ltd), (space4environment)Gundula Prokop (Environment. Agency Austria), Mirko Gregor (space4environment). ETC/ULS consortium partners: Environment Agency Austria, ALTERRA Research Institute, Department of Remote Sensing, Lechner Non-profit Ltd space4environment, GISAT, The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Universitat Autonònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Universidad de Málaga (UMA), Ecologic Cover photo © vadimgouida ‒ Fotolia.com Showing erosion control on a slope with straw sock catch, silt fence Legal notice The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commission or other institutions of the European Union. Neither the European Environment Agency, the European Topic Centre on Urban Land and Soil Systems nor any person or company acting on behalf of the Agency or the Topic Centre is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this report. Copyright notice © European Topic Centre on Urban, Land and Soil Systems (2018) Reproduction is authorized provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. More information on the ETC-ULS is available on the Internet at http://uls.eionet.europa.eu/.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Regulation and Land Use Change: Do Local Wetlands Bylaws Slow the Conversion of Open Spaces to Residential Uses?
    LAND USE REGULATION AND HOUSING Environmental Regulation and Land Use Change: Do Local Wetlands Bylaws Slow the Conversion of Open Spaces to Residential Uses? By Katharine R. E. Sims and Jenny Schuetz Kennedy School of Government June 2007 RAPPAPORT Institute for Greater Boston Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Environmental Regulation and Land Use Change: Do Local Wetlands Bylaws Slow the Conversion of Open Space to Residential Uses? Katharine R.E. Sims and Jenny Schuetz CID Graduate Student and Postdoctoral Fellow Working Paper No. 18, May 2007 © Copyright 2007 Katharine R.E. Sims, Jenny Schuetz, and the President and Fellows of Harvard College Working Papers Center for International Development at Harvard University Environmental regulation and land use change: Do local wetlands bylaws slow the conversion of open space to residential uses? Katharine R. E. Sims† and Jenny Schuetz‡ Abstract The conversion of open space land to residential, commercial, and industrial uses as cities develop is an issue of significant environmental concern. Local governments play a key role in land use decisions and can use a variety of policy tools to influence the rate of land use change or to permanently protect open space. An important but controversial form of local regulation in Massachusetts is local wetlands protection bylaws, which give towns and cities additional regulatory power over land near wetlands. This paper uses newly compiled information about land use regulations in towns and cities in eastern Massachusetts, in combination with data on land use changes and other community characteristics, to analyze the relationship between local wetlands bylaws and rates of conversion from open space to residential land uses between 1985 and 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Development Inspector I
    Code: C715 CITY OF ROSWELL, GEORGIA FLSA: N WC: 9410 CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATION PG: 507 EEO: 3 CLASSIFICATION TITLE: LAND DEVELOPMENT INSPECTOR I PURPOSE OF CLASSIFICATION The purpose of this classification is to perform technical inspections of development sites and construction projects to determine compliance with all City, County, State and Federal codes and regulations regarding erosion and sediment control, grading, clearing, drainage, landscaping, infrastructure, wetlands, and stream buffers. Provides interpretations and explanations of codes, regulations and ordinance and corrective requirements. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS The following duties are normal for this position. The omission of specific statements of the duties does not exclude them from the classification if the work is similar, related, or a logical assignment for this classification. Other duties may be required and assigned. Interacts and communicates with numerous groups and individuals on various inspection related topics; provides interpretation and assistance with code definitions to the public, staff, developers, and related parties; conducts construction meetings with property owners, developers and contractors; responds to reports of alleged ordinance or code violations and drainage issues; advises utility company subcontractors on erosion control requirements; assists in presenting educational information concerning erosion control, environmental impact of storm water pollution, and other topics; works with City and State DOT to ensure project compliance. Performs
    [Show full text]
  • Public Incentives Harmful to Biodiversity
    REPORTS & DOCUMENTS Public Incentives Harmful to Biodiversity Sustainable Development Report of the commission chaired by Guillaume Sainteny Public Incentives Harmful to Biodiversity Guillaume Sainteny Chairman Jean-Michel Salles Vice-Chairman Peggy Duboucher, Géraldine Ducos, Vincent Marcus, Erwan Paul Rapporteurs Dominique Auverlot, Jean-Luc Pujol Coordinators October 2011 March 2015 for the English version Foreword Public debate has sometimes tended to equate preservation of biodiversity with the emblematic fate of certain endangered species. We now know the importance of protecting fauna and flora as a whole, not only in certain “hotspots” upon the earth, but even in our local meadows and lawns. Of course, this involves not only the variety of species – and thereby the planet’s genetic heritage –, but also the many interactions between the latter (through pollination, predation and symbiosis) and the full scope of “services rendered” to mankind. For even though we are not always aware of it, mankind benefits from the immense services freely provided by ecosystems. This is the source from which we draw our food, as well as fuel and building materials. Apart from these “appropriable” goods, biodiversity enables the purification of water, climate stabilisation and mitigation, and the regulation of floods, droughts and epidemics. In short, biodiversity is vital for us. Yet, throughout the world, an increasingly rapid rate of decline in biodiversity has been observed for several decades, giving rise to fears of serious upheavals in our
    [Show full text]
  • Review and Development of a Land Consumption Evaluation Method Based on the Time-Area Concept of Last Mile Delivery Using Real Delivery Trip Data
    sustainability Article Review and Development of a Land Consumption Evaluation Method Based on the Time-Area Concept of Last Mile Delivery Using Real Delivery Trip Data Maren Schnieder * , Chris Hinde and Andrew West The Wolfson School of Mechanical, Electrical and Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough LE11 3TU, UK; [email protected] (C.H.); [email protected] (A.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 11 November 2020; Accepted: 15 December 2020; Published: 19 December 2020 Abstract: The paper proposes an evaluation method providing decision support for policymakers in regard to the land consumption of transport activities. Due to the increasing pressure on vehicle parking, traffic jams and the housing crisis in large cities, it is important to use road space effectively. The primary objective of this paper is to review and evaluate the published research about the time-area concept, as well as proposing an evaluation method for the time-area requirements of vehicles used in last mile delivery such as pedestrian porters, bicycles, cargo bikes, sidewalk autonomous delivery robots (SADRs) and delivery vans. The time-area concept measures the size of an area occupied during a transport activity and the duration for which it is occupied for standing, as well as moving transport units. While most of the research applies the time-area concept to compare various modes of transport used to move people around a city, this paper focusses on moving parcels and evaluates the effect that operating strategies and policy changes have on the time-area requirements of a single mode of transport.
    [Show full text]
  • Urbanization on the US Landscape: Looking Ahead in the 21St Century
    Available online at .sciencedirect.com 1 LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING Landscape and Urban Planning 69 (2004) 23 9-234 This article is also available online at: ~.elsevier.com/locate~landurbplan Urbanization on the US landscape: looking ahead in the 21st century Ralph J. Alig a**, Jeffrey D. Kline a, Mark Lichtenstein VSDAForest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jeflerson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA Training Support Division-Natural Resources Branch, US Army Environmental Center, 5179 hadley Road, Aberdeen Proving Gro~md,n/fD 21010, USA Accepted 30 July 2003 Abstract Conversion of rural lands to urban and other built-up uses affects the mix of commodities and services produced from the global land base. In the United States, there was a 34% increase in the amount of land devoted to urban and built-up uses between 1982 and 1997. This increase came predominantly from the conversion of croplands and forestland, with the largest increases in deveIoped area happening in the southern region of the country. In an analysis of drivers influencing developed land uses in the US. we found results that were consistent with hypothesized relationships, including significant increases in development as a result of increases in population density and personal income. From these results, we projected changes in potential future urbanization and development by 2025 given estimated increases in population and real personal income. The projections suggest continued urban expansion over the next 25 years, with the magnitude of increase varying by region. US developed area is projected to increase by 7996, raising the proportion of the total land base that is deveIoped from 5.2 to 9.2%.
    [Show full text]