Journal of Urban Planning and Development

In recent years, widespread traffic congestion has provided a new impetus to initiate transportation‐demand management (TDM) actions. Across the nation, dozens of grass‐roots transportation management associations (TMAs) have been formed as private‐public partnerships to address mobility problems in localized areas. Many of the successful transportation‐demand management programs have been created by private development organizations, interested in promoting their marketability by assuring high levels of mobility. Results have been impressive, with peak‐period traffic reductions ranging between 10% and 20%, and higher for specific developments. The potential savings in new construction can be sizable and well worth the modest costs associated with optimizing the efficiency of existing transportation investments. Successful application of TDM can save developers money, when contrasted to exactions typically associated with traffic mitigation through capacity additions. TDM can also provide positive marketing opportunities. As we plan for new projects, the development community should aggressively pursue TDM as an important element of traffic mitigation programs. In addition, local governments should be receptive to TDM, as it offers major benefits to the general public.

Hillside development is a hot topic in Southern California. Many of the hillside projects developed in the past few years have been insensitive to the natural character of the terrain. The resulting public displeasure has caused cities and countries to enact new laws and technical criteria for hillside development. Unfortunately, the professional design community has not always had significant input. Design standards thus produced have frequently proven ineffective or counterproductive. The guidelines suggested here are intended to contribute technically sound, economically feasible, and environmentally acceptable hillside development. The guidelines are specifically drafted to apply to single‐family housing projects on steep terrain in Southern California. However, many of the concepts have far broader application. Topics include design procedure, general layout, grading concepts, revegetation of slopes, drainage, and erosion protection.

The effects of growth generated by development impact a community in a number of ways. Increases in population and commercial activity place additional requirements on the infrastructure and service capabilities of a community as well as increasing revenues. These requirements increase operating expenditures and often require significant capital outlays. Frequently, additional staff must be added to maintain or increase service levels. New infrastructure must typically be built to meet water treatment, wastewater treatment, and other needs. Identifying these requirements early in the development process is the key to ensuring an adequate public sector response. Local governments must be able to estimate the magnitude and timing of these impacts if they are to plan adequately. This paper describes models developed to analyze the fiscal impacts of development and meet the information needs of local governments. The use of impact fees to fund capital outlays are also addressed, and a model to calculate defensible impact fees is described along with a discussion of the salient issues that should be considered when implementing such fees.

The problem of environmental contamination is a serious impediment to the development or redevelopment of real property. The cost of cleanup can easily render a proposed redevelopment project economically infeasible. This paper describes how sites known to be contaminated can be profitably and successfully redeveloped. Statutes establishing the ground rules for environmental obligations are reviewed. The environmental investigation process, including environmental reviews and sampling and testing plans, is discussed. Alternative treatment methods for soil and ground‐water contamination are also discussed. A site mitigation flowchart is presented to show how remediation alternatives can be developed for each environmental risk. Development alternatives can then be developed for each remediation alternative, and, based upon benefit/cost considerations, can be used to produce a remediation and development plan for the redevelopment of contaminated property. A hypothetical example of the redevelopment of a contaminated site is then described, and several actual projects involving the redevelopment of contaminated sites are identified.

This paper discusses the permitting and acquisition processes associated with a major land‐use decision, which occurred throughout the 1980s in southeast Broward County, Florida. The paper discusses the history of private and public attempts to preserve an important urban wetland area while accommodating lawful and economically advantageous development. The purchase of almost 1,300 acres in a coastal metropolitan area was consummated by state and local financial contributions, totaling $20,000,000. The development approvals for an industrial commercial complex and a 1,400‐unit residential development have a value in excess of $50,000,000. The federal wetland permitting program serves as a backdrop for an analysis of regulatory issues that are frequently confronted when urban wetlands are the subject of permit applications. The West Lake case history is used to demonstrate weaknesses in the process, and the paper contains recommendations to improve the situation.