The Effectiveness of Planning Regulation to Curb Urban Sprawl. The Case of Striano (NA).
Abstract
Italy is facing an almost irreversible, extremely serious condition. A vital asset for humankind and the ecosystem, such as land, today suffers the negative effects of anthropogenic activities, first of all its uncontrolled and limitless consumption.
Such transformation of landscapes and environments, due to the misuse of land, not only affects the Italian country, but it spills over its borders: across Europe, urban sprawl is threatening agricultural productivity and biodiversity, increasing the risk of flooding, reducing water resources and contributing to global warming (ISPRA 2012).
The catastrophic impacts related to the spread of urban sprawl have made the identification of planning strategies capable of reducing the phenomenon essential. In Italy, many regions are trying to conform regulations and planning tools to control land use, and among them the Campania Region.
To date, only few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of these tools in curbing the phenomenon (Anthony, 2004), to this end, the paper aims to assess the ability of Campania’s Planning regulations and tools in checking urban sprawl.
The analysis was conducted in the town of Striano, within the complex urban conurbation of the Metropolitan Area of Naples, which can be considered an example of urban sprawl development pattern.
In particular, a hypothesis of Area Action plan for Striano was developed on the basis of the measures imposed by Regional Law n. 16 of 2004 and the ones proposed by PTCP of Naples, then the potential outcomes achieved by the Plan were evaluated in terms of land use and density.
The case study results show a disconnection between the current legislation and the new planning tools which are pending approval, therefore, the paper suggests the need to update Campania’s Planning legislation to the new guidelines, which are much more effective in terms of land protection.
Downloads
References
Anthony J. (2004), Do State Growth Management Regulations reduce sprawl?, Urban Affairs Review, 39:3.
Antrop M. (2004), Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe, Landscape and Urban Planning 67.
Arbury J. (2005), From Urban Sprawl to Compact Citiy – An analysis of urban growth management in Auckland, Thesis for the Master of Arts in Geography and environmental Science, University of Auckland.
Benevolo L. (2008), La città nella storia d’Europa, Editori Laterza, Bari.
Burchell R. W., Mukherji S. (2003), Conventional Vedelopment Versus Managed Growth: The Costs of Sprawl, American Journal of Public Health.
Calthorpe P. (1993), The next American Metropolis, Princton Architectural Press, New York.
Carruthers J., Ulfarsson G. (2003), Urban sprawl and the cost of public services, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design.
Chin N. (2002), Unearthing the roots of urban sprawl: a critical analysis of form, function and methodology, Centre for advanced spatial analysis CASA, Working Paper Series, University College London.
Chorianopoulos I., Pagonis T., Koukoulas S., Drymoniti S. (2010), Planning, competitiveness and sprawl in the Mediterranean city: The case of Athens, Cities, 27, 249-259.
Clawson M. (1962), Urban Sprawl and Speculation in Suburban Land, Land Economics 38:2, 94-111.
Duany A., Plater-Zyberk E., Speck J. (2000), Suburban Nation: the rise of sprawl and the decline of the American dream, North Point Press, New York.
EEA (2012), The State of Soil in Europe, JRC Reference Report, Report EUR 25186 EN, European Union, Luxembourg.
EEA (2006), Urban sprawl in Europe. The ignored challenge, Technical Report 10, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
Ewing R. (1997), Is Los Angeles-style sprawl desirable?, Journal of the American Planning Association, 63:1, 107-126.
European Commission (2011), Orientamenti in materia di buone pratiche per limitare, mitigare e compensare l’impermeabilizzazione del suolo, Europea Union, Belgium.
FAI, WWF (2012), Terra Rubata. Viaggio nell’Italia che scompare.
Friedman J., Miller J. (1965), The Urban Field, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31:4, 312-320.
Fulton W., Shigley P. (2005), Guide to California Planning, Solano Press Books, California.
Gerundo R., Grimaldi M. (2010), Consumo di suolo e scelte di pianificazione urbanistica, in Giuseppe Las Casas, Piergiuseppe Pontrandolfi, Beniamino Murgante (curr.), Informatica e Pianificazione Urbana e Territoriale. Atti della Sesta Conferenza Nazionale INPUT 2010, Libria Editore, Melfi.
Giammarco C., Isola A. (1993), Disegnare le periferie, Carocci Editore, Roma.
Galster G., Hanson R., Ratcliffe M.R., Wolman H., Coleman S., Freihage J. (2001), Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and Measuring an Elusive Concept, Housing Policy Debate, 12:4.
Gordon C. V. (1950), The Urban Revolution, Town Planning Review, 21, 3-17.
Grgurevic O. (1981), The evolution of urban sprawl and its reasons, Center for Metropolitan Planning and Research: The Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland.
Harris L. (1984), The Fragmented Forest – Island Biogeography Theory and the Preservation of Biotic Diversity, University of Chicago Press.
Harvey R., Clark W. A. V. (1965), The nature and economics of sprawl, Land Economics 41:1, 1-9.
Hess G. (2001), Just what is sprawl, anyway?, Carolina Planning, University of North Carolina Department of City and Regional Planning, 26.
Holden R., Turner T. (1997), Western Europe, Current City Expansion and the Use of GIS, Landscape and Urban Planning, 36:4, 315-326.
ISPRA (2012), Qualità dell’ambiente urbano - VIII rapporto.
IUNC – International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (1980), World Conservation Strategy: Living Resources Conservation for Sustainable Development, Switzerland.
Kautz R. (1993), Trends in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat 1936.1987, Florida Scientist, 56:1, 7-24.
La Greca P., Barbarossa L., Ignaccolo M., Inturri G., Martinico F. (2011), The density dilemma. A proposal for introducing smart growth principles in a sprawling settlement within Catania Metropolitan Area, Cities, 28, 527-535.
Le Goix R. (2005), Gated communities: sprawl and social segregation in southern California, Housing Studies.
Levy J. M. (2006), Contemporary Urban Planning, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Mazzeo G. (2011), Città a meno del piano, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Mazzeo G. (2009), Dall’area metropolitana allo sprawl urbano: la disarticolazione del territorio, TeMA Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 2:4, 7-20.
Mitchell J. (2001), Urban sprawl, National Geographic.
Mumford L. (1961), La città nella storia, Bompiani, Milano.
Papa R. (2009), Il governo delle trasformazioni urbane e territoriali, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Phelps N. A. (2010), Suburbs for nations? Some interdisciplinary on the suburban economy, Cities, 27, 68-76.
Piguet P., Blunier P., Lepage M. (2011), A new energy and natural resources investigation method: Geneva case studies, Cities, 28, 567-575.
Provincia di Napoli (2007), Piano Territoriale di Coordinamento, proposta di piano, Napoli.
Regione Campania (1982), Legge Regionale n° 14 del 20/03/1982, Indirizzi programmatici e direttive fondamentali relative all'esercizio delle funzioni delegate in materia di urbanistica, ai sensi dell' art. 1 - II comma - della legge regionale 1° settembre 1981, n. 65.
Regione Campania (2004), Legge Regionale n° 16 del 22/12/2004, Norme sul governo del territorio.
Rossi A. (2010), L’architettura della città, Città Studi Edizioni, Torino.
Sardena A. (2010), Mixite funzionale e morfologica dello spazio abitabile dei quartieri residenziali, in Giuseppe Las Casas, Piergiuseppe Pontrandolfi, Beniamino Murgante (curr.), Informatica e Pianificazione Urbana e Territoriale. Atti della Sesta Conferenza Nazionale INPUT 2010, Libria Editore, Melfi.
Secchi B. (2008), La città del ventesimo secolo, Editori Laterza, Bari.
Mehaffy M., Tachieva G., Qamar L., Vogel M. (2011), The unbearable costs of sprawl, http://www.theatlanticcities.com/, access: 10/02/2014.
Young D., Keil R. (2010), Reconnecting the disconnected: The politics of infrastructure in the in-between city, Cities, 27, 87-95.
Copyright (c) 2014 Tema. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following:
1. Authors retain the rights to their work and give in to the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons License - Attribution that allows others to share the work indicating the authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors can adhere to other agreements of non-exclusive license for the distribution of the published version of the work (ex. To deposit it in an institutional repository or to publish it in a monography), provided to indicate that the document was first published in this journal.
3. Authors can distribute their work online (ex. In institutional repositories or in their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and it can increase the quotations of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access)