KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research (대한토목학회논문집)

Korean Society of Civil Engeneers (대한토목학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of Low Impact Development (LID) Integrated in Local Comprehensive Plans for Improving Urban Water Cycle

도시 물순환 개선을 위한 도시기본계획과 저영향 개발(LID) 연계성 분석

  • 강정은 (부산대학교 도시공학과) ;
  • 현경학 (LH 토지주택연구원) ;
  • 박종빈 (부산대학교 사회환경시스템공학과)
  • Received : 2014.04.24
  • Accepted : 2014.06.03
  • Published : 2014.10.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recently, Low Impact Development (LID) has been emphasized as a critical strategy for improving urban water cycle and adapting to climate change. LID is needed to be incorporated in urban planning and development process for effective implementation in the real world. However, little research has examined the relationship between urban planning and LID in Korea. This study addresses this critical gap by 1) examining whether current urban planning institutional system considers LID or not and 2) assessing the extent to which local comprehensive plans integrate LID in seven large cities. Study results show that a few planning guidelines declaratively mention the need of LID but they don't include specific LID strategies. In addition, we found that 7 local comprehensive plans in the sample received a mean score of 11.71, which represents 19.52% of the total possible points and there are wide variations among cities. These findings indicate that there is still considerable room for improvement of local governments on LID. We propose the revision of planning guideline by incorporating LID principles and non-structural and structural LID technologies.

최근 심화되고 있는 기후변화에 적응하고 도시의 물순환을 개선하기 위한 주요 전략으로 저영향 개발(Low Impact Development; LID)이 강조되고 있다. 저영향 개발의 효과적인 실현을 위해서는 도시계획과의 연계가 필수적이다. 그러나 국내에서는 아직 도시계획과 저영향 개발의 연계현황 분석과 연계방안에 대한 연구가 미흡한 상태이다. 이에 본 연구는 1) 현재 국내 도시계획 및 개발 관련 제도에서 저영향 개발에 대한 고려사항이 있는지 검토하고, 2) 도시계획의 기본방향과 전략을 제시하는 도시기본계획을 대상으로 계획분석 기법을 활용하여 저영향 개발과와의 연계성을 분석하여 그 방안을 제시하였다. 분석결과, 도시개발 관련 일부 사업지침에 저영향 개발이 반영되어 있으나, 선언적 수준의 내용만 포함되어 있어 도시계획 전반에 실질적 영향을 미치지는 못하고 있었다. 또한 7개 대도시의 도시기본계획을 대상으로 저영향 개발 계획요소와의 연계성을 검토한 결과, 획득가능점수의 약 19.52% (11.71점/60점)를 획득하여 현재까지는 도시기본계획에의 저영향 개발 반영 수준이 매우 낮으며, 도시 간 편차도 큰 것으로 나타났다. 도시계획 내 저영향 개발 주류화를 위해 저영향 개발을 주요 개발계획 원칙으로 명시하고, 부문별 계획에 비구조적, 구조적 저영향 개발 요소기술이 반영되도록 도시기본계획 수립지침이 개정될 필요가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Baker, I., Peterson, A., Brown, G. and McAlpine, C. (2012). "Local government response to the impacts of climate change: An Evaluation of Local Climate Adaptation Plans." Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 107, pp. 127-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.05.009
  2. Berke, P. R. (1994). "Evaluating environmental plan quality: The Case of Planning for Sustainable Development in New Zealand." Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640569408711967
  3. Berke, P. R. and French, S. P. (1994). "The influence of state planning mandates on local plan quality." Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9401300401
  4. Berke, P., Godschalk, D., Kaiser, E. and Rodriguez, D. (2006). Urban land use planning, University of Illinois Press.
  5. Berke, P., Spurlock, D., Hess, G. and Band, L. (2013). "Local comprehensive plan quality and regional ecosystem protection : The Case of the Jordan Lake Watershed, North Carolina, USA." Land Use Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 450-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.08.009
  6. Brody, S. D. (2003). "Examining the role of resource-based industries in ecosystem approaches to management: An Evaluation of Comprehensive Plans in Florida." Society and Natural Resources, Vol. 16, No. 7, pp. 625-641. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920309184
  7. Brody, S. D. (2003). "Implementing the principles of ecosystem management through local land use planning." Population and Environment, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 511-540. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025078715216
  8. Burby, R. J. and Dalton, L. C. (1994). "Plan can matter! The role of land use plans and state planning mandates in limiting the development of hazardous areas." Planning Administration Reveiw, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 229-238. https://doi.org/10.2307/976725
  9. CIRIA (2007). The SUDS manual.
  10. City of Edmonton (2011). Low impact development best management practice design guide edition 1.0.
  11. Coffman, L. S. (2002). "Low impact development: An Alternative Stormwater Management Technology." Handbook of water sensitive planning design, pp. 97-123.
  12. EPA (2014). Low impact development, Available at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/green/ (Accessed: May 7, 2014).
  13. Forest Research (2010). Benefits of green infrastructure.
  14. Fu, X. and Tang, Z. (2013). "Planning for drought-resilient communities:An Evaluation of Local Comprehensive Plans in the Fastest Growing Counties in the US." Cities, Vol. 32, pp. 60-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.03.001
  15. Han, W. S. (2013). "Construction and implication of green city for disaster reduction in the United States." Planning and policy, Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, Vol. 381, pp. 108-115 (in Korean).
  16. Hyun et al. (2012b). Installation manual and monitoring of LID - decentralized rainwater management facilities in Asan Tangjung, No. 2012-41 (in Korean).
  17. Hyun et al. (2012a). Installation manual of LID, No. 2012-41 (in Korean).
  18. Hyun, K. H. (2010). "Way to go for low-carbon city : LID(Low Impact Development)." Geoenvironmental engineering, Vol. 11, No. 6, Korean Geo-environmental Society, pp. 6-13 (in Korean).
  19. Hyun, K. H. and Lee, J. M. (2013). "Characteristics of heavy metals in soil in infiltration splash blocks and rain gardens for management of roof runoff from apartment buildings." Desalination and Water Treatment, Vol. 51, pp. 4146-4154. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2013.781111
  20. Kaiser, E. J., Godschalk, D. R. and Chaplin, F. S. (1995). Urban Land use planning (4th ed.), Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
  21. Kang, J. E. (2012). "An assessment of flood mitigation policies integrated in local comprehensive plans: The case of Florida in the United States." J. of Environmental Policy, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 59-84. https://doi.org/10.17330/joep.11.4.201212.59
  22. Kang, J. E., Peacock, W. G. and Husein, R. (2010). "An assessment of coastal zone hazard mitigation plans in Texas." Journal of Disaster Research, Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 526-534. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2010.p0526
  23. Keep it Clean Partnership (KICP) (2008). Breaking down the barriers to low-impact development in Colorado.
  24. Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) (2011). How should we use regional climate change information (in Korean).
  25. Korea Planners Association (KPA) (2012). Urban planning 5th, Boseonggak (in Korean).
  26. Ministry of Environment (ME) (2008). Manual on installation and management of non-point pollution source reduction facilities (in Korean).
  27. Ministry of Environment (ME) (2009). Natural management of non-point pollutant source using LID techniques (in Korean).
  28. Ministry of Environment (ME) (2013a). Application manual of low impact development technique for environmental impact assessment (in Korean).
  29. Ministry of Environment (ME) (2013b). Guideline on element technology of low impact development to build healthy water circulation system (in Korean).
  30. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTMA) (2012). Guidelines of urban.county master planning (in Korean).
  31. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTMA) (2012). Sustainable new town planning standards (in Korean).
  32. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTMA) (2012). Waterfront space development guideline (in Korean).
  33. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTMA) (2013). Rules on decision.structure and Installation standards of urban.county planning facilities (in Korean).
  34. Oregon Sea Grant Extension, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon State University, NOAA (2008). Barriers and opportunities for low impact development: Case Studies from Three Oregon Communities.
  35. Prince George's County, Maryland (1999). Low-impact development design strategies: An Integrated Design Approach.
  36. Puget Sound Partnership (2012). Low impact development: Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound.
  37. Smart Growth/Smart Energy Toolkit (2014). Low impact development (LID), Available at: http://www.mass.gov/envir/smart_growth_toolkit/pages/mod-lid.html (Accessed: May 7, 2014).
  38. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) (2008). Low impact development manual for Michigan.
  39. Stevens, M. R. (2013). "Evaluating the quality of official community plans in Southern British Columbia." Journal of Planning Education and Research.
  40. Tang, Z. and Brody, S. D. (2009). "Linking planning theories with factors influencing local environmental plan quality." Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 36, pp. 522-537. https://doi.org/10.1068/b34076
  41. Tang, Z., Brody, S. D., Quinn, C., Chang, L. and Wei, T. (2010). "Moving from agenda to action: Evaluating local climate change action plans." Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 41-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560903399772
  42. The Low Impact Development Center (2000). Low impact development:A Literature Review.
  43. The Low Impact Development Center (2010). Low impact development manual for Southern California.

Cited by

  1. A Basic Study on the features of LID-related Ordinance Enactment conducted by Local Government - mainly on Seoul City, Suwon City and Namangju City - vol.25, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2016.25.1.25
  2. Development and Application of a Low Impact Development (LID)-Based District Unit Planning Model vol.9, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010145
  3. Key Factors Influencing Low Impact Development Adoption by Local Governments vol.24, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2015.24.2.119