Surveying Methods of Environmental Protection in Urban Development Plans Using Transfer Development Right

Subject Areas : environmental management

Mojtaba Rafieian ¹ (Associate Professor, Urban Planning&Design Department, Art &Architecture Faculty, Tarbiat Modares University)
Zahra Alsadat Ardestani ² (Assistant Professor, Urban Planning&Design Department, Art &Architecture Faculty, Kharazmi University *(Corresponding Author).)

Received: 2008-06-25 Accepted : 2009-03-07 Published : 2016-12-21

Keywords: : Environmental Protection, Development Right, Transfer Development Right, urban development plans,

Abstract :

Background and Objective: Since the adoption of the Rio Declaration in 1992 the concept of using a collaborative approach in various fields of development and environmental protection is accepted at the international level. This declaration announces collaborative approach as an important factor in environmental management and making decision in sustainable development. It makes authorities to apply this approach as much as possible. Method: According to academic and international references and citing the ongoing projects in the world in this field, the intervention mechanisms will be identified and checked. Also the method of applying methods, components and indexes in this approach will be expressed. Findings: The increasing rate of development programs lead to the environmental, economic and social warnings. In response to issues and crises from them, concepts and approaches were proposed which one of them was transfer development right. Discussion and conclusion: This approach makes the owners voluntarily participate in the preservation lands programs and therefore government shouldn’t pay any money for those programs. This research is tried to explain transfer development right approach and its goals and mechanisms.

References:

1. Katz, B., 2002.Smart growth: The future of American’s metropolis. Center for Analysis­ of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics.


2. Brueckner, J.K., 2000. Urban Sprawl: Diagnosis and Remedies. International Regional Science Review 23: 160-171


3. Kelly, F.N., 2006. Trends inDevelopment, Zoning Density, and the Demand for Transferable Development Rights: A Case Study of Montgomery County, Maryland. University of Maryland.


4. Reid, S.K., 2007. Stimating the Impact on Agencies and Users of Transferable Development Rights Programs: An Empirical Study of the Lake Tahoe System. University of Nevada, Reno.


5. Karkainen, B., 1994. Zoning: A Reply to Critics. Journal of Landuse and Environment Low10: 2_46


6. Fischel, W.A., 2004. An Economic history of Zoning and a Cure for its Exclusionary Effects. Urban Study 42: 7-14


7. Danner, J.C., 1997. TDRS_Great Idea but Quastionable Value. The Appraisal Journal 65: 133-143, Banking Information Source


8. Johnston, R.A., and M.E., Madison 1997. From Landmarks to Landscapes-a review of current practices in the transfer development rights. Journal of the American Planning Association 63: 365_379


9. Henig, J., 1989. privatization in the United States: Theory and Practice, Political ScienceQuarterly. 104: 649-670


10. Pruetz, R., 2003. Beyond Takings and Givings, saving natural areas, farmland, and historic landmarks with transfer development rights and density transfer charges. Arje Press, Merina Del Rey, CA.


11. Maleki, Gh., 2005. Revisited Esfahan Comprehensive plan, Designing Transfer Development Rights Mechanism, Saravand Company.


12. صالحی، اسماعیل؛« مواضع حکومت های محلی در اجلاس جهانی توسعه پایدار(ژوهانسبورگ)»، شهرداریها، 1386. ش 43.


13. خدایی، زهرا، "مطرح کردن ضرورت بومی سازی در شهرسازی ایرانی به منظور رسیدن به تعادل و پایداری مجدد"، تیرماه 1385


14. Ford, F. and Jason, E., 2002. Transferof development right programs: Using the market forcompensation and preservation,see information in: http://governmentcce.cornel.edu/doc


15.  “Transfer of Development Rights Report”, 2004. South County Watersheds Technical Planning Assistance Project


16. Taintor, R., 2001. “Transfer of Development Rights”. April


17. McConnell, V. Walls, M. and E. Kopits 2006. Zoning, TDRs and the Density of Development. Journal of Urban Economics 59:  440_457


18. Manavi M., 1996. “Transfer of Development Right: Promissing Tool of Future”, Pace University Landuse Law center.


19. Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders,1992. Planning for Transfer Development Right: A Handbook for New Jersey Municipalities, 28-30


20. Pizor, P.J., 1986.Making TDR Work: A study of program Implementation.Journal of the American planning association 52: 203-211


21. Kopits, E. and McConnell, V. and M. Walls, 2005. Making Markets for Development rights Work", Washigton DC


22. Pruetz, R., 1997. Saved By Development:Preserving the Environmental Areas, Farmland and Historic Landmarks with Transfer of Development Rights,Burbank, CA: Arje Press.


23. Montgomery County Planning Board, 2002. Meeting minutes of July 25, 2002. Available at: http://www.mc-mncppc.org/board/meetings-Archive


24. Dallesio, T. and R. Pirani, 2006. The Economics of Transferring Development in the New Jersey Highlands. The Regional Planning Association.


25. Kaplowitz, M.D., Machemer, P., and Pruetz, R., 2008. Planners’ experiences in managing growth using transferable development rights (TDR) in the United States. Journal of Land Use policy 25: 378_387


26. Roddewig, R.J., and C. Inghram 1987. Transferable Development Rights programs: TDR’s and the real estate Marketplace. American Planning Association Advisory Service.


27. New Jersey Pinelands Commission, 2003. Pinelands National Reserve: A Cooperative State & Federal Partnership.