Land Use And Transportation Planning: A Case Study

Given the complexity of towns and cities, it is interesting to compare NSW legislation and planning instruments to other states within Australia, to discover ways to perhaps further improve the SILEP in NSW. This report will aim to help evaluate the implementation of the LEP Standard Instrument in comparison to other approaches to local plan making in Australia. The first section will look at the NSW local planning scheme for Leichhardt LGA. The second section the Victorian local planning scheme for Melbourne LGA as a comparison.

However through urban planning and development, solutions can be discovered and put into action to allow easier flow into urbanism. Transportation issues for example can be resolved by planning for the future of Los Angeles and by investing in the public transportation system. An example of this would be investing in bike paths, lanes, and routes so that people with low income, such as Hispanic immigrants, can travel to their locations in an easier manner through biking. An investment “to fill in gaps and complete the citywide bike plan” for this method of transportation “calls for nearly 1,700 miles of new and upgraded paths and lanes before 2035,” which can seem difficult but possible (Laura J. Nelson). Biking as a new main method of transportation “can help reduce crashes of all types and assist in reaching an ambitious new city goal of eliminating traffic deaths by 2025” (Laura J. Nelson). A solution to gentrification through urban planning is to instead focus on a new method of development called Asset Based Community Development. Through this different urban revitalization process, an inside out approach is taken where development occurs by focusing on the communities’ assets and building upon them, unlike gentrification. When the community is dedicated and determined to rebuild their torn down neighborhoods, it is possible to bring new life to the neighborhood by focusing on assets such

Steen, Karen. "How Leftover Urban Spaces Can Fix Big Problems for San Francisco." SPUR. N.p., 23 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Dec. 2016. .

The study of urban spaces, especially with respect to gentrification, has increased dramatically in significance and relevance in the past several decades. With the resurgence of city living’s popularity, urban revitalization has occurred in neighborhoods across the United States and brought with it significant economic and social change.

There are many who suggest the solution to the decline of the suburbs is to urbanize the area by densifying and overall making the suburbs more similar to a city. Laura Vaughan argues that the development of a spatial layout similar to that of a city would help the suburbs to become more efficient socially and economically. However, this approach directly contrasts the purpose of the suburbs, which was originally meant to provide a private, quiet environment for single family homes away from loud and busy city life. In his book, “Sprawl: A Compact History,” Robert Bruegmann explains that suburbia is not a bad thing but possesses “benefits that urban planners fail to recognize” and is a natural process of the growth of urbanism. While the suburban landscape does possess much potential, those who support the continued existence of the suburbs as they exist are naive and fail to recognize the environmental, social, and economical impact that the suburbs impose. The suburbs possess many social and political issues that need to be addressed. There is no doubt that there is massive potential in the suburban

Urban sprawl was a major problem and had many negative effects. "Suburban sprawl, “called urban sprawl was a result of overpopulation. Sprawl occurred when cities spread outward. Forests and farmland were being destroyed to create new housing subdivisions, shopping centers, offices, parking areas, civic institutions and roadways. State governments built highways and roads to serve all the new commuters moving in and out of the city. Developers chose to build on less expensive land farther away from the urban core. Land prices were lower and housing in these developments was more affordable. Some people chose a longer commute in exchange for more comfortable, low-priced housing. The sprawl was a chronological process that devastated the land and life of the American people. This problem described here continues to be a problem. And many people are unaware that urban sprawl continues to be a problem. Friendly neighborhoods, traditional pedestrian have fallen victim to this problem. Environmental activists claimed that urban sprawl, was a substantial environmental threat. But activists concerned about sprawl should concentrate on existing government policies that encourage suburban development and prevent greater redevelopment of urban areas.

Gentrification is the process of buying and renovating houses and store the housing in urban neighborhoods, which results in increase property values and replacing the lower income and small businesses. Once gentrification happens, rental units are often change to a more luxury housing or condominiums that are available to be purchased. As real estate changes, land use is also altered. Before the gentrification happens, the area usually consist of low-income family housing and sometimes light industries. But after the gentrification, it shifts the housing in an urban community lifestyle, along with businesses, office, restaurants, retails, and other form of entertainment. Because of this gentrification, it significantly affects the area’s character and

5 steps that require to drivable suburbs American Dream is partition and land-use rules to permit walkable Urbanism; educating the monetary community; ending subsidies for drivable sub-urbanism. The first step changing the zoning and land use of form based coded. The second step is educating the monetary community. The third step is ending the subsidies affirmative drivable sub-urbanism, creating sprawl pay its own manner. The fourth step is investment. The fifth step intensively manages walkable urban districts to make sure that the required complexes really happen on the bottom. The financing investing within the acceptable infrastructure, significantly rail-based transit” that may even be delineate as adding subsidies for walkable Urbanism; and “intensively managing

The convenience of living in an urban or suburban neighborhood can be appealing to many people. Choosing between areas can sometimes be overwhelming for some individual. People are not only concerned about the safety of a community, but they are also concerned about the environment. Although some neighborhoods might look attractive, people should consider the expense that comes with it, and how commuting will affect them in the long run. Nevertheless, both neighborhoods have their specific advantages and disadvantages. When choosing between an urban or suburban neighborhood, it is important for people to research the community, the expense, and convenience

Gentrification has been a controversial issue both in urban planning and politics primarily due to the displacement of poor people by the rich folks (Shaw & Hagemans, 2015). Many individuals have viewed gentrification as an illegal act that should be avoided at all costs. On the other hand, another group of people believe that gentrification is the way forward to promoting growth and development. With such contrasting ideas, this paper is going to take a look at gentrification from a positive and negative perspective, its effects, and how it can be prevented or contained. Apart from this, the paper will also address the following questions.

In today’s society, it may seem that gentrification can eliminate poverty and increase neighborhood opportunities. Low-income residents and property owners will be the first to be altered by gentrification. In an email to the editor at the Atlantic, Freeman, the director of the Urban Planning program at Columbia states “ Gentrification brings new amenities and services that benefit not only the newcomers but long term residents too. Full service

New Urbanism, a burgeoning genre of architecture and city planning, is a movement that has come about only in the past decade. This movement is a response to the proliferation of conventional suburban development (CSD), the most popular form of suburban expansion that has taken place since World War II. Wrote Robert Steuteville, "Lacking a town center or pedestrian scale, CSD spreads out to consume large areas of countryside even as population grows relatively slowly. Automobile use per capita has soared, because a motor vehicle is required for nearly all human transportation"1. New Urbanism, therefore, represents the converse of this planning ideology. It stresses traditional planning, including multi-purpose zoning,

This topic is very significant because over the past several decades, urban and neighborhood planners have strayed away from green spaces throughout their projects. Green spaces encourage interaction among citizens as well as improving the environment in the vicinity. In this divisive political climate, it is almost necessary to provide areas where families and individuals can come together and enjoy a less stressful environment.

Fukushima is the third largest prefecture in Japan (≅13,800 km). Before GEFE, Fukushima had a population of almost 2 million people, many of whom lived in the capital, Fukushima City. As a result of a diverse geography (high peaked mountains, forests, and over 150km of coastline), Fukushima was a major food production source for Japan. In fact, Nakadori region was the fourth largest agricultural region in Japan, yielding rice, peaches, apples, pears, tomatoes, and cucumbers. Tobacco, raw silk and livestock were major exports from the region and the fishing industry boomed. Since GEFE, Fukushima has dropped from the nation’s fourth-largest rice producer to its seventh, with production reportedly slipping 17% and an estimated 100,000 farmers have lost an estimated 105 billion yen ($1 billion). The fishing industry lost 75% of its workers while the number of commercial fishing boats went from 185,465 to 153,034.

This approach has several advantages. First, it provides much more spatially-detailed information than traditional data at the aggregate level of planning districts. Hence, using this disaggregate information, we can suggest policy implications to establish specific land use and transportation planning. UrbanSim, one of the advanced microsimulation model developed by University of Washington, uses gridcells of 150*150 meter, which presents spatially detailed structure and enables researchers to evaluate current urban land use patterns as well as predict future urban land use change at the micro level. However, a building scale analysis provides much more benefits because it is a more realistic model and can be easily combined with current urban big data. For example, if this agent-based model is combined with complex human behaviors data, it can provide much more specific information for predicting events of an emergency such as a building fire and disasters from earthquake or tsunami. Also, if this model is combined with information on spatial human activities from mobile-phone, it can provide great benefits for managing spatial and temporal planning for the urban places. More specifically, we can identify hot spots during daytime and nighttime, which can help to predict travel demands as well land use demand.