2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Barriers to implementation of low-impact and conservation subdivision design: Developer perceptions and resident demand

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Investing in housing development requires massive amounts of capital for an investment that can only be recovered several years later and with no guarantee that the property will sell at the anticipated price. As a high-risk industry involving a number of multifaceted relationships (Bowman & Thompson 2009), housing development relies on market fluctuation that entail changing economic conditions and consumer preferences (Buttimer Jr. et al 2008). Furthermore, according to Goh (1997a), the various building industry rules and regulations often serve to keep Bumiputera developers out of the housing industry.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Investing in housing development requires massive amounts of capital for an investment that can only be recovered several years later and with no guarantee that the property will sell at the anticipated price. As a high-risk industry involving a number of multifaceted relationships (Bowman & Thompson 2009), housing development relies on market fluctuation that entail changing economic conditions and consumer preferences (Buttimer Jr. et al 2008). Furthermore, according to Goh (1997a), the various building industry rules and regulations often serve to keep Bumiputera developers out of the housing industry.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ecology and Society 22(2): 1 https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss2/art1/ Market-based explanations contend that developers have determined that sustainable development is cost prohibitive and often prescribe novel forms of market analysis to counter developer perceptions. For instance, while conceding that there are increased upfront costs associated with green materials and technologies, low impact development practices, permitting and certification fees, and protracted development time lines (Carter 2009, Bowman andThompson 2009), several studies demonstrate that green alternatives also capture a market premium in sales (Pejchar et al 2007, Choi 2009, Eichholtz et al 2010, Talen 2010). This market premium should, in theory, be attractive to the real estate development industry; however, evidence suggests that developers may underestimate public demand Thompson 2009, Galuppo andTu 2010).…”
Section: Theories To Explain the Failure Of The Sustainable Urban Resmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Emerging evidence suggests mixed success of such ordinances because of variability in the quality of regulations, some of which permit relatively conventional developments to pass as sustainable alternatives (Beuschel and Rudel 2009, Langlois 2010, Wald and Hostetler 2010, Göçmen 2013. Interestingly, recent surveys found that developers do not perceive land-use regulations or building codes as having much of an impact on the implementation of sustainable alternatives, although they do view the planning agencies that enforce them as inflexible (Bowman and Thompson 2009, Bowman et al 2012, Galuppo and Tu 2010. In addition to landuse regulations, some municipalities offer incentives, such as grants or tax breaks to developers; however, these incentives tend to be relatively small compared with the high cost of development and do not offset additional costs or risks associated with sustainable urbanism development (Kingsley 2008, Choi 2009).…”
Section: Theories To Explain the Failure Of The Sustainable Urban Resmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nationally, one impediment to using LID has been the concerns that it costs more than conventional SWM practices (Bowman and Thompson 2009, CBP et al 2002, The Civic Federation 2007, LMI 2005. These perceptions have been strongly identified as a barrier to the adoption of LID methods in Florida (Kipp et al 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%