Geographical Coverage – must include all of the land area subject to the planning or regulatory jurisdiction of the local government preparing the plan.

Subject Matter – all subject matter must be related to the physical development of the community. However, some social aspects of the community are often included like economic development or health care. 

Time Horizon – must include thinking about the community as it could be over a relatively long time horizon…usually 20 years.

THE GOALS OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING 

Levy provides you with a list of goals that communities have in creating a comprehensive or general plan.  Because each community differs, what they try to address in their plan also differs from community to community.  These goals serve to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community: 

   1. Health

•  

  o Application of the community’s zoning to develop areas of the community appropriately – control of density and congestion.

      o Provision of water and sewage treatment.

      o Industrial development that serves the community’s

      vision.

2. Public Safety

      o Safe development of streets and highways.

      o Protection from natural hazards.

3. Circulation – A term synonymous with TRANSPORTATION

         o Making sure the community’s streets and highways

       facilitate the movement of vehicles and yet protect

      pedestrians.

1. Provision of Services and Facilities

•  

  o Determining the location and number of parks, schools, hospitals, senior/teen centers, etc., to best serve the community.

5. Fiscal Health

•  

  o Trying to locate land uses appropriately so that the “budget” available to the local government can meet the needs of these land uses for services.

6. Economic Goals

•  

  o The community may seek to develop a pattern of land uses and circulation that can accommodate commercial and industrial sites, provides good access to such sites, and makes the provision of utilities to such sites easy to supply. 
   
  

   -4-

   7. Environmental Protection

•  

  o Providing the means to protect the “valued” landscapes

•  

  in the community such as wetlands, steep slopes, and fragile

•  

  or ecologically-valued lands.

•  

  o Wisely designating areas of the community where access to commercial and industrial activities is easy in order to protect air and water quality.

8. Redistributive Goals

•  

  o While it is viewed as “desirable” to have plenty of affordable housing, often residents of a community are not in favor of locating it in their neighborhood (NIMBY).  Community officials and planners need to support this in order to meet both laws and in the name of equity. 

ELEMENTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE/GENERAL PLAN

ELEMENTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE/GENERAL PLAN

The term “element” refers to a part of the plan that deals with a particular subject. 

1. This can be a specific concern of the community, like transportation or housing, derived from the purposes or goals of creating the plan as stated above.

2. It can also focus on a specific geographical part of the community, such as the CBD or a particular neighborhood.

Frequently, there are state laws requiring the preparation of a community comprehensive or general plan that states different requirements for communities of varying sizes, budgets, and planning abilities.

Usually, the elements to be included in a comprehensive plan or general plan are specified by state law; Like Arizona’s “GROWING SMARTER” ACTS that we will look at briefly. 

What does Arizona state law say regarding the preparation of general plan?  Spelled out in the Arizona Revised Statutes Section 9.  Contents of the law come from the passage in the later 1990s/early 2000s of a set of laws, collectively 

“GROWING SMARTER”, THE REVISION OF A.R.S 9-461.05:

~ All communities, regardless of size, must include, when creating a general plan a LAND USE ELEMENT and a CIRCULATION ELEMENT.

~ All communities between 2,500 and 10,000 people with a growth rate of 2% or more for the preceding 10 years AND all communities withpopulations greater than 10,000 must include in their general plans 5 ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS :  OPEN SPACE, GROWTH AREA, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, COST OF DEVELOPMENT, and WATER RESOURCES.

~ Cities of greater than 50,000 people have additional elements that they can address if they wish, depending on the perceived needs in their community. (See the next page for a list of possible topics that can be included in a community’s General Plan). 

Who prepares “General Plans”? 

•  
  1. Planning Commission – Usually charged with this responsibility by the City Council.
  2. Citizens – Assist in the creation of the Plan as required by State Law.
  3. Planning Department Staff – Provide the professional expertise to help with the right “language”, the preparation of maps and other graphics.
  4. Private Consultants – Can be hired by the City Council to prepare the Plan usually if no/too few professional planning staff availablein the community.  They may or may not include citizens in their process of plan development.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS

While the process of comprehensive planning can vary from community to community, there are some general steps involved that give order to this process:

1. A Research Phase

•  

  * Provides insights into current conditions and enables some forecasting to take place.  A “what if” kind of process.  Involves undertaking many studies that get data on such things as population trends, employers, housing conditions, land uses, traffic counts, etc.

2. Clarification of Community Goals and Objectives

•  

  * In a manner similar to that which you did in class, a facilitation process takes place in which those involved in the planning process make suggestions about what the community should do to reach its “vision” of itself or achieve its “mission”.

3. A Period of Plan Formulation

•  

  * In this step, citizens are not usually involved.  It is usually the planning professional who takes all the information from Steps 1 and 2, and refines, analyzes, and explains this to reflect what the citizens said they wanted to do.

4. A Period of Plan Implementation

•  

  * To put the Plan into action is perhaps the most important part of the whole process.  Creating a plan for just the sake of doing so (to meet the letter of the law, for example) is a waste of everybody’s time.

•  

  * The What, Who, and When of the Plan Objectives are important components of implementation because these form the responsibilities of the Plan and provide “milestones” for goal/objective accomplishments.

•  

  -8-

5. A Period of Review and Revision

•  

  * After the Plan has had several years’ worth of being put into action, then it is useful to see if the Plan is doing what the citizens wanted it to do.  If not, then parts of it will need to be changed.

Keeping the community informed and interested in the process is the job of the community’s Public Information Officer or other town officials who make public appearances at meetings of service clubs (Lions Club), public education facilities (community college), or reports in local newspaper/television station.

Let’s go through a brief exercise putting these “steps” into a make-believe situation so that you can see how this process might unfold.

TRADITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS UNDER ZONING

MUNICIPAL ASSUMPTION:  “GROWTH IS GOOD…THE MORE THe BETTER!” 

•  
  • DEVELOPMENT PROCEEDS ON THE BASIS OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS OR AT BEST, A LARGE DEVELOPMENT WITH A SINGLE DEVELOPMENT TYPE (I.E., RESIDENTIAL) – PAD, PUD

•  
  • ZONING IS UNCONCERNED WITH THE TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT OR ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROVISION OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

•  
  • WHAT IS TYPICALLY IGNORED ARE THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF “LOT BY LOT” DECISIONS – FOR EXAMPLE, TRAFFIC GENERATION STATISTICS

COMMUNITIES NEED TO ASK:

      “IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DESIRABLE AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AT THIS PLACE AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME?”

WHEN COMMUNITIES ASK THIS QUESTION, THEN THEY ARE ON THE ROAD TO MANAGING GROWTH.

I.   What is “Growth Management”? 

•  
  1. Definition of “Growth Management” when used to direct the philosophy of a community toward land development:
     1. It is the regulation of the

•  
  •  

    Amount -  How much?

•  
  •  

    Timing  -  When?

•  
  •  

    Location  -  Where?

•  
  •  

    Character  -  What is it like?

•  
  1. Goals of Growth Management Programs:

•  
  1.  
     1. To preserve the environment
     2. To ensure a desirable pattern of land development in future years
     3. To preserve an existing lifestyle and community ambiance (quality of life or “community character”)
     4. To ensure the adequacy of community facilities to meet future needs
     5. To ensure that the community will not be fiscally swamped by development-imposed costs
     6. To retain the “status quo” – exclusionary zoning

1. Three general characteristics of growth management “systems”:

1. 
   
   1. Very close and long-term coordination between land-use controls (use of more flexible means like PUDs) and public capital investments (extension of infrastructure),
   2. Use of more modern approaches to land-use control (like cluster zoning or performance zoning), and
   3. A greater sensitivity to environmental issues.

However, there is no hard and fast line separating growth management from more traditional planning. 

•  
  1. Growth management, as a specific objective for communities, first appeared in the 1960s and 1970s: several terms emerged that tried to capture the essence of what communities were trying to do:

•  

  * growth management – management (by means of the 4 factors identified in #1, above) without any intention of limiting growth or community population size

•  

  * growth control – implied that growth would not only be managed but limited in some way…community population “cap”

      * no growth – intent was to stop growth entirely 

Which term has come into general use by professionals and the public alike?

•  
  1. In what kinds of situations are growth management policies most likely to be

•  

  effective?

•  

  ^ Suburban areas/cities where there is still substantial growth potential

•  

  ^ Counties and towns outside metropolitan areas

•  

  ^ Where rapid growth and a high degree of environmental consciousness

•  

      characterize the community

•  

  ^ Communities with a high degree of general prosperity 

Origins of the Growth Management Concept

What role did these historic forces play in the Growth Management concept?

• Post-World War II
• The 1960s Environmental Movement

 How Do Growth Management Programs Work? 

• 1. Like many other types of land-use controls, there are “winners” and “losers”
• when growth management techniques are applied.
• * Residential growth is the target of almost all growth management programs.  
• Why?
• Because growth management programs slow residential growth relative to employment growth, “winners” and “losers” are created in the housing market:  How are these “stakeholders” affected? 
• # A Homeowner
•  Rental Property Owner
• A Potential Resident of the Community
• Contractors, Real Estate Brokers, Builders
• What are the impacts to neighboring communities without growth management programs?  See what happened to Boulder County, CO
• There is an ethical question attached to growth management centering on the idea of “Defense of Privilege”.  What does this mean? 

Local Government Growth Management Programs 

•  
  1. The Ramapo Plan – derived from the system instituted by this New York City suburb and upheld by the New York Appellate Court (that state’s highest court) in Golden vs the Town of Ramapo decided in 1972.

•  

  *  Elements of the Ramapo Plan – Each development proposal amasses

•  

      points based upon its proximity to existing services or on the ability to

•  

      provide them.  The proposal must achieve a set number of points in

•  

      order to be approved.  If the proposal couldn’t amass the required points

•  

      at that time, then its approval was postponed until the points could be

•  

      achieved. 
  

•  

  * How was this not a taking of the rights of landowners/developers to develop land in the town?  Mainly, because the proposal could be presented again at a later time when it had the points it needed to be approved.  Such delays are not unconstitutional and are termed phasing growth to match the provision of services needed by the development. 
  

•  

  The Court said, “ Where it is clear that the existing physical and financial resources of the community are inadequate to furnish the essential services and facilities which a substantial increase in population requires, there is a rational basis for ‘phased growth’ and, hence, the challenged ordinance is not in violation of the Federal and State Constitutions.”  
  

•  
  1. Boulder, CO – Focuses on residential development and limits building permits to construct only 400 units per year (which is about 1% of the city’s housing stock).  If more than 400 units are requested, then each applicant gets a smaller portion than they requested so that all applicants get to build someunits.  Boulder has surrounded itself with purchased open space or other public lands so that its situation is like Flagstaff’s…gradually diminishing vacant land on which to build residential units. “Buildout” in a decade.

•  

  Results:  “Tight” housing market with high prices.  City Response:  New development with >5 units, then 20% of those must be “affordable” - $90,000-120,000 or if <4, then developer pays a cash contribution.  Despite these efforts, affordable housing is scarce. 
  

•  
  1. Bucks County, PA (near Philadelphia) – County has no direct control over local land use so development districts are identified wherein population growth is likely to happen.  Infrastructure is recommended to be built within these districts and this is where development is supposed to occur.  Areas outside these districts are designated “holding zones” to discourage urban-style development and property-tax abatement measures (CUVA) encourage farmers to keep their land in agriculture.  In areas where development can occur, “performance zoning” standards are applied:  # units/acre, amount of impervious surface permissible, more design freedom (expressed by the “market”).

•  
  1. Fairfax County, VA – Located west of Washington, D.C., this county has experienced extreme development pressures.  County levies “proffers”, a form ofexaction that requires developers to pay (either by doing the work or giving a cash contribution to pay for the work) for all infrastructure improvements…these may not all be “on site”, but developers can be required to fix “off site” problems created by the development.  The County uses its ability to grant or deny rezonings as a means of getting developer cooperation.  Large residential development projects must include affordable housing or must give a contribution of a fund to build it elsewhere. 

•  
  1. Ft. Collins, CO – This community has adopted a technique to direct growth into specified areas and to require development to pay its own way.  The city occurs in a 65-square mile “urban growth area”.  All land within this growth area is potentially subject to annexation into the city and as the city annexes land within this area, urban services are guaranteed to be provided by those developing the land.  If one developer benefits by the improvements created by another developer, then the first developer must be “compensated” by the second developer.
  
  

.  State-Level Growth Management

Despite cities being termed “creatures of the state”, most power to oversee the development of land has remained with cities and towns and with states playing only a very minor role in land development.  Therefore, a “quiet revolution” has taken

place at the state level in which states are “getting back” some of the land use control powers they gave to states.  This is especially true for regulation in environmentally-sensitive areas. 

• State Land Use Development Control Programs:
• * Hawaii – Adopted the first statewide land use controls in 1961.  Why necessary here?  All land in the state assigned to one of 4 major categories: urban, rural, agricultural, conservation.  Limiting urban growth is the focus of this program. 
• * Florida – (1985) Facing serious environmental problems…why?  Program requires infrastructure, road capacity, other services to be in place – “concurrency requirements”.  Sprawl is controlled by promoting infill – what is this?
• * Oregon – (1973) Utilizes urban growth boundaries (UGBs) to promote dense development in communities, thereby limiting sprawl, and to protect environmental resources.  Community comprehensive plans must be approved by a state department.
•  New Jersey – Most densely populated state in the nation. Developed a state plan used to advise communities on issues of growth – the plan had  a “carrot” in that state monies for capital facilities within communities are given only to those communities in conformance with the state’s plan. Also has legislation in place to protect fragile coastal areas and 2 commissions oversee 2 special areas within the state.
•  Other states have programs at various levels.  Some seek to divert growth into designated areas, some use state monies to achieve specific objectives, some emphasize protection of environmentally-fragile areas, some place emphasis on “phasing” growth to coordinate with services. 

. What is “Smart Growth”? 

1. Concept appeared in the mid-1990s; first used by Maryland Governor Parris

           Glendenning in that state’s plan to manage growth.

B. Prompted by concerns generated by urban sprawl.  How is “sprawl” defined?  No universally accepted definition but contains these aspects as identified by Reid Ewing:

$   Exhibits a pattern of “leapfrog” or scattered development

$   “Strip” commercial development – characterizes business locations along

     major roads, “shoestringing” along the highway

$   Contains large expanses of low-density or single-use development

      He goes on to say that these aspects produce functional symptoms as well:

•  
  1. Poor accessibility – getting around is inconvenient – makes it difficult to

•  

  perform errands “efficiently”.

•  
  1. Lack of functional open space – plenty of undeveloped land in evidence, but most of it is in private ownership and thus unavailable for recreational or other public use.

   C.  Citizen concerns have been the biggest force behind the development of smart growth polices because of the following issues:

      +   Traffic congestion

      +   Preservation of the natural environment

      +   Excessive “urbanization” of their environs 

1. What are the Tools of Smart Growth?

1. 
   
   1. Standard tools like land use controls, tax policies, and public subsidies
   2. Promotion of infill development and adaptive reuse
   3. Acquisition of “development rights”
   4. Establishment of Urban Growth Boundaries to direct where development is appropriate and where it isn’t.
   5. Use of New-Urbanism design principles that promote development on small lots and mixed uses that also promote public transportation

1. Smart Growth, like its forerunner Growth Management, has numerous Pros and

Cons.  However, even the most conservative of states (like Arizona) are beginning to realize that while it may be inevitable, growth can be channeled and even slowed so that it doesn’t have to overwhelm the existing residents of communities, either fiscally or physically.

1. Implicit in the notion of “smart growth” is the acknowledgement that the land and...

communities located therein are not limitless.  Because current thinking is increasingly coming around to this, the concept of “sustainable development” is gaining wider and stronger support. 

Planning for Sustainability – What is Sustainable Development?

In many ways, it is at the local level that “sustainability” has the best chance of making a difference.

The goals of sustainable development are:

1. Environmental quality – many reasons for viewing this as important

2. Social equity – often taken to mean greater equality of wealth and more

  opportunity for poorer, less-advantaged people.  Also this concept is important

      because any social or economic system must achieve a satisfactory degree of

      equity or the internal stresses generated by inequality or deprivation will

      render it unstable.

3. Economic development – means that, in order for the society to achieve Goal 2,

      then some means of “access” to the economic system must exist.  The question

      remains as how best to do this because that often means “growth” – a concept

      that seems to negate the idea of “sustainability”.

What is Economic Development?

• Those activities performed by departments/agencies in the public and private sectors that are aimed at attracting businesses and industriesto an area.
• Refers to such activities at a variety of "levels"...from those performed by a small town Chamber of Commerce to the large restructuring that goes on at the national government level to promote positive relationships with other countries in terms of trade.

We will focus our attention in this chapter on the activities to promote economic development at the local and state levels.

Your text says that there are well over 15,000 organizations in the United States, ranging from municipalities, counties and states, devoted topromoting local and state economic development.

Engaging in activities to promote the local economy is something citizens expect local and state governments to do.  WHY?

1. If jobs in a community are plentiful, then this "tightens" the

  labor market thus driving up wage rates.  Migration into the

  community to take jobs results in "multiplier" effects...other

      jobs created as a result of this in a sort of "spin-off" process

      and the whole economy grows.

2.     Local and state governments are always looking for ways to

  "broaden the tax base".  Remember what I said about

"property taxes"...residential development vs. commercial development in terms of demand for services and tax contributions. 

-2-

3. In recent decades, property owners have resisted property tax raises and thus local governments are looking for  alternative ways to generate revenues.  A better local economy means more people from whom to get taxes.

Because each community and state acts as its own independent economic unit, there is incredible competition among communities and states for businesses and industries that are "relocating"...trying to find a "new home", which your author calls "interplace competition".

This interplace competition has promoted economic development planning as a major subfield or specialty of the planning profession. 

Historical Roots

Historical Roots

The entire settlement of our nation, from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific, has been spurred by efforts to improve the settlers' economic conditions, whether that was in subsistence farming, ranching, or commercial agriculture.

Communities were settled on the Frontier to both supply those engaged in various economic activities with materials/products they needed to survive and also to serve as a "hub" or central location to bring in their products for sale...from cattle to wheat.

This "market function" of Frontier towns was enhanced because of the transportation linkages provided...ways to bring in goods needed by the Frontier people and to take out the commodities produced by these people (See picture of Flagstaff on the next page).

It was most often the merchants of the community who pushed for ways to link their communities to the broader economy and to strengthen their competitive position in relation to other nearby competing communities.

Flagstaff, Arizona.  This photo shows what the town looked like in the early 1880s and the central place the railroad held in the economy of the region.

Two important transportation ages are described in your reading:

1. The Canal Era - roughly 1800 to 1830 - saw the linkage of

  New York City with newly-established towns in the Midwest –

      thus bettering their merchants' position for getting raw materials

and selling finished products to settlers in this area, when compared to merchants in Boston and Philadelphia.

2. The Railroad Era – put an end to water-based transportation advantage; many of the early railroads were built with municipally-raised funds and the competition among cities and towns to be on a rail line was fierce.

After the Civil War, in order to rebuild their shattered economies, communities in the Old South offered a number of financial "incentives" to the burgeoning textile industries of the Northeast encouraging them to move to locations in the South.  Again, it was primarily the merchants of these Southern communities who led this effort.

The Federal Presence in Local Economic Development

• The Federal Presence in Local Economic Development

• Became more pronounced during the Depression of the 1930s and has continued to the present time.
• After WWII, a new concept emerged to describe the economic situation in the U.S. - Structural Unemployment - defined as a mismatch between the supply of labor and the demand for labor.  

• The mismatch can apply to skills: changes in technology result in people losing their jobs...jobs that have been abolished by new technologies - changing agriculture, manufacturing, services techniques. Plenty of the "new" types of jobs and not enough skilled people to fill them.

•  The other type of mismatch is geographical: firms may move out of an area because of a desire to locate in a better climate (Q of L factors), to move in search of more skilled labor, and just going out of business entirely.  Since capital is more mobile than labor, a firm can easily relocate but their labor force cannot make this change so easily.  Despite the general prosperity that followed WWII, not all parts of the country enjoyed this...for example, Appalachia was "left behind" as regions on either side of it prospered.

• Beginning in 1961, Congress decided to address the problems coming from structural unemployment.  We will look only at the geographical aspect of structural unemployment:

•  Area Redevelopment Administration - 1961 – made grants available to communities to promote economic development, based on county-level statistics on employment and poverty that were generated by the U.S. Census.
• Economic Development Administration - 1965 – replaced ARA, continued to do the same thing; funding cut back during the 1990s.

• Federal grants continued: 
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG):
• Local communities (over 50,000) were directly given lump sums of money to use in a variety of projects of their own determination – grant money did not have to have a specified use that the Feds watched over.  Still available today.

• b. Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG): Provided monies to cities to help them revitalize their deteriorated downtowns – ended under Reagan/Bush

• Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB): Communities sold bonds in order to finance industrial site development – backed by the Feds.  Still available.
•  Federal aid to communities for economic development peaked during the Carter presidency (1977-1981) and
• drastically reduced during the Reagan/BushI years.
•  Did not revive during the Clinton administration and
•   
•      the BushII presidency had no interest in it either.  Both
•   tried to target specific places that experienced job
•   losses but didn’t give out much funding. 
• Relationship between Planners and Economic Developers
• Both are concerned with public investment in
•       infrastructure, land-use controls, environmental
• regulations, etc., affecting where industrial/commercial
• developments occur.
• Planners have many goals for the community with
• economic development being one of these;for ED planners, bringing new commercial/industrial development is the major goal. 

State Economic Development Efforts

State Economic Development Efforts

•  
  • States support efforts for local economic development in 4 ways:

•  
  •  

    a. Each state has a "department of commerce"

•  
  •  

    whose purpose is to provide information on the state and try to guide firms to communities in the state that have the "environment" they are looking for.

•  

  b. States offer a variety of financial incentives, such

•  

        as investment tax credits, low-interest loans,

•  

        infrastructure grants, labor force training grants,

•  

        and so on, to encourage firms to locate or expand

•  

        within the state's borders.

•  
  •  

    c. A majority of states have overseas offices in Europe and Asia to help develop overseas markets for their firms and to encourage investment in their states by overseas firms.

•  
  •  

    d. States are becoming more involved in assisting major industrial and commercial relocations and expansions and are more willing tospend large sums of money to attract economic activity.

•  
  • Several examples of state efforts to attract industry are given in your reading.  The use of "subsidy packages" to attract industry and commercial businesses to the state can have positive or negative consequences:  new jobs, larger tax base, increase in property values, etc., are all the positives; however, population growth demanding more services, producing more traffic, and other negatives must be weighed against the pluses. 

What a Community Can Do to Promote Its Economic Growth?

There are 4 major ways a community can facilitate its own economic growth:

1. Sales and Promotion - The community can engage in a variety of public relations, advertising, selling, and marketing efforts.  This is usually done as an important activity of a "chamber of commerce".  However, a Community can also do this independently of the Chamber's activities by the creation of a special city "department" focused on economic development activities.  Or, the Community and the Chamber can pool their resources and hire a person to do this for both entities.  However it is configured, "selling" the community involves the preparation of promotional literature, participation in state efforts, and the single pursuit of potential businesses and industries for the community by whomever does the "recruiting".  See Barstow, CA example, below.

Barstow, CA’s Business Incentives Program Components 

Subsidization - The community can "pay a portion" of the costs of development (subsidize) in a variety of ways:

a. Tax abatement - involves a reduction of property taxes on commercial/industrial development

b. Revolving loan funds - making low-cost loans or other credit- granting arrangements to help business growth

c. Other tax abatement programs - lowering or forgiveness of a variety of other taxes: sales tax, inventory tax, commercial occupancy tax, business tax, etc.

d. Creation of an "enterprise zone" – a technique to help redevelop/restore a deteriorated central city area, involving incentives to promote new investment. These include the tax reductions, direct grants of money, or the "waiving" of some land use regulations to permit higher densities. -

Problems from doing this:

^ While these efforts may attract a business, it results in increasing costs to other businesses. ^ Inability to know if a subsidy will be decisive – would the business locate in the community anyway??? Does providing incentives really cause the business to locate in the community???

 “Quality of Life” considerations – a subjective determination but

  can include such things as:

•  
  1. access to nature and recreational opportunities
  2. cultural resources like art museums, symphony orchestra
  3. ** public education – high quality institutions (elementary/secondary schools, technical/college degree programs)

Steps in the Economic Development Planning Process

Like other types of planning, economic development planning has a process that contains "steps":

4 steps

Steps in the Economic Development Planning Process

Like other types of planning, economic development planning has a process that contains "steps":

1. Needs Assessment - In this step, the community decides the purpose of the economic development plan.  Most communities commonly pursue the addition of more jobs to the community

and strengthening the tax base. Being clear about the goals of the plan will prove useful if the spending public money for projects is involved.

2. Market Evaluation - Because a community will try to "sell" itself  to prospective firms, there needs to be an objective

   assessment of the community's strengths and weaknesses

(called a SWOT analysis) in a number of areas such as wages, availability of a labor pool, land, construction costs, the "mix" of existing commercial and industrial establishments, educational system, and other "quality of life" items.  This can help the community target its marketingtoward firms that are most likely to be interested in the community.

3. Assessment of the Consequences of an Economic Development Program -  Besides the monetary pluses and minuses imposed in "recruiting" and in getting the new firms into the community, other factors may be affected, such environmental quality, traffic flow, housing markets, etc. Trying to identify and plan for these effects is important because the goal is to make the community more prosperous, not less.

4. Plan Formulation - might include some or all of the following

      Elements:

      a. An advertising and marketing program

      b. A plan for the use of subsidies as "incentives"

      c. A program of "capital investments" – to upgrade/expand

            facilities

      d. An evaluation or "adjustment" in the application of land    use controls

      e. A process for periodic plan review and updating

As the information above reveals, any community that hopes to retain or establish a vital local economy must work hard to achieve this goal.

What happens when a community that has a “single”, major employer faces the closure or relocation of that employer? 

Transportation planning is the most “elaborate and mathematically well-developed” area of planning.

•  
  • A fusion of engineering, economics, and urban planning.
  • The manipulation (number crunching) of enormous amounts of data required for TP necessitates the use of sophisticated computer techniques.
  • TP not usually done by a community in isolation; rather this type of planning happens in some sort of “regional” effort…e.g.,  NACOG here in northern Arizona…which is an association of many communities.
  • However, individual communities are responsible for many of the “pieces” of the regional transportation issue.

Recent Trends in Urban Transportation

Recent Trends in Urban Transportation

1. The Growth in Individual Vehicle Ownership

      ~  In 1945, 133 million people in the U.S. and 25 million cars or

          1 vehicle for every 5.3 people.

      ~  In 1998, 273 million people in the U.S. and 193 personal

          vehicles or 1 vehicle for every 1.3 people.

Difficult to separate out the forces of auto ownership and

      suburbanization since they fueled each other.

3. In terms of public transportation (transit) , the situation was

      practically reversed.

      ~  The use of buses, subways, and light rail reached an all-time

          high in 1945 because of the “shortages” produced by WWII.

      ~  Ridership in 1945 was 19 billion trips by fare-paying

          passengers; by 1975, that number had declined to an

          all-time low of 5.6 billion trips.

What are some of the reasons for the decline in the use of

      public transportation?

Suburbanization – the dispersed pattern of housing

      development made the use of individual autos preferable.

            *  Problems with collection of riders – getting the rider to

                  the boarding point in order to use transit.

              * Problems with distribution of riders – getting them

                from end of transit trip to her/his actual destination.

      *  Problems of spacing and speed – the more stops, the

                more stops transit makes, the slower the speed and

                the more time it takes to made a trip.

Where does public transit work best?

Where does public transit work best?

      O In older, eastern cities where housing and workplaces are

            more highly “concentrated” – where the problems listed

            in #4 aren’t an issue since cities like New York and

            Chicago have highly concentrated urban cores, with jobs

            and housing are found near transit stops.

      O In this situation, an automobile is a “hindrance” or at

            least not as attractive because of congestion on the

            streets and no place to park.

Paying for Transportation

While we won’t spend much time with this, it is important to know something about how both private and public transportation “costs” compare:

Direct costs of private transportation – use of personal vehicles:

      #  purchase, fuel, maintenance, insurance, parking, etc.

      #  taxes used to construct and maintain roads – license

          fees, gasoline taxes, etc.

      #  hidden costs – air pollution, accidents, urban sprawal

•  
  • Direct costs of public transit – use of buses, subways, etc.

      #  Fares account less than 40% of transit operating costs

           with the rest being paid for by state and local govts.

      #  About 50% of all transit capital costs (land purchase,

          any needed construction, and vehicle purchase) is

          supplied by the Federal govt.; with 25% coming from

          other sources of non-fare revenues (taxes and tolls),

          and the remaining 25% from state and local govts.

• Clearly, public transit doesn’t even begin to “pay its own way”, so why do we subsidize it? 

• There are people who cannot use private vehicles.

• The belief that, if available, it promotes “circulation” by reducing the number of private vehicles. 

• Fosters a more “compact” form of urban design.

• Seen as a means to “redistribute” income; viewed  as the provision of a “below cost” product to low income people, thereby “transferring” income to them.  

Changes in the Federal Role

Since the completion of the Interstate Highway System, with over 40,000 miles of highway constructed in the late 1980s, the Federal role has become less obvious in transportation planning/construction.

However, in 1991, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), was passed by Congress.  This act continued to provide money to state and local govts. to build/maintain road, but it also contained some new, interesting provisions:

1. A total of $24 billion over the “life” of the Act to be spent in a  “flexible” way by communities to support a wide range of

      transportation projects, ranging from highways to bike paths.

      See Denver’s Bicycle Master Plan.

2. Some of this money is to be spent for purely “safety” measures

      and “enhancement” or beautification of roads.

3. Currently, the funds from this Act are about the only type of

      Federal funds cities can get to help them with any type of

      Construction projects.

WHAT IS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT?

Today, one of the most active and important departments in any city government is that of community development.  Typically, community development departments oversee zoning issues, the private/public land development process, the enforcement of various city codes (like building codes), and other duties related to the building and land development process.

“Community development” covers a broad range of goals and activities:

~  Helping promote a community’s economic growth.

~  Helping to increase the quality and quantity of housing types.

~  Promoting the commercial activities in the community, esp. retail. ~  Improving the quantity of community facilities.

~  Furthering urban design goals…making the community more

    attractive.

~  Providing a variety of services for special populations or segments

    of the community. 

THE HISTORY OF URBAN RENEWAL

THE HISTORY OF URBAN RENEWAL

In the 25 or so years after the end of WWII, most large communities’ efforts at “community development” centered on revitalizing their commercial and residential areas, especially those in or near the inner city.  While the picture, below, is perhaps an extreme example of inner city deterioration, the post-war years saw not only physical but social problems emerging from inner city “blight”. 

To address these problems, communities were assisted by a famous Federal program.  This program was called Urban Renewal.  It was the outgrowth of the implementation of the Housing Act of 1949. 

Goals of Urban Renewal:

Goals of Urban Renewal:

~ Eliminating substandard housing

~ Revitalizing city economies

~ Constructing good housing

~ Reducing de facto segregation 

The methods of Urban Renewal:

^ Goals were overseen by local agencies.

^ The process involved clearance of old buildings and the

        construction of new structures.

^ The funds for this process came from the Federal government

        and disbursed by local agencies.

Urban Renewal stands as the largest Federal urban program in U.S. history.  By 1973, the program had spent $13 billion (a figure that would be5 times that in today’s dollars).

The Urban Renewal program officially ended in 1973 with the

presidency of Richard Nixon. 

Your text’s author says this was a program that was a classic illustration of the old adage, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”  Why?

*** Probably the most serious consequence of this program was  the destruction of some 600,000 housing units (most for

      low income people) with only 250,000 housing units rebuilt…or  the destruction of 2¼ times as many housing units as were

      rebuilt.  Posed many ethical questions regarding this program.

While the goals of Urban Renewal were similar to those of modern Community Development, the approach to achieving them was radically different.

What factors are involved when someone wants to “redevelop” land with existing structures on it? (Like happened with Urban Renewal)

1. In order to “redevelop” land that already has structures on it,  the developer must not only buy the land but the structure

  as well, which has an additional value, no matter how run-

      down the structure is.

2. Another factor limiting redevelopment is that in already-built-up  areas, the land is owned by many individual property

         owners and in order to build a project of any size, the

  developer has to negotiate with many landowners, thus

  slowing down the development process. 

To combat these factors inhibiting redevelopment, the Housing Act of 1949, created Local Public Agencies (LPAs), whose funding was to be 2/3^rdsfrom the Federal government and 1/3^rd from the local government.  These LPAs had the force of the Federal government behind them, so they could:

• acquire land through eminent domain clear and otherwise prepare sites to be built on  

• sell or lease these sites to private developers at rates substantially below the market rate

The process introduced by the LPAs gave a new “power” to government that was supposed to be prohibited by the Constitution:  that of the “government” taking private property for something besides a “public purpose”.  The question revolved around whether the resulting economic and residential housing improvements constituted a “public purpose”. 

This question was first addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1954 in the case Berman v. Parker, in which case the Court sided with the city in supporting its “right” to use eminent domain to acquire private properties to redevelop.… remember Justice Douglas who said that communities have a right to decide what constitutes “beauty” as well as what is safe and healthful; i.e., deteriorated inner cities cannot be deemed “beautiful” and this hurts their economic potential.

Thus, the Court sided with communities in the exercise of their right to use eminent domain for what they deem as a public purpose.

Further support to this position was given recently (June 2005) in the U.S. Supreme Court case Kelo v. New London.  What were the “facts” of this case?

[image]

Why do you think our very conservative Supreme Court upheld this right…of cities (New London, CT) to condemn the homes of private property owners and transfer this land to the private developer of a large commercial project?

However, the Kelo decision angered many people, from politicians to property owners.  As the article we just read noted, many states have passed bills to restrict the use of eminent domain by stating that the state and local communities are restricted in their right to take private property if the purpose for doing so is to transfer this land to another private party…especially important are those bills that ban private party to private party transfersfor “economic development” purposes.  Like Arizona Prop. 207, below. 

URBAN RENEWAL – THE POSITIVES AND THE NEGATIVES

Despite its high ideals (eliminating substandard housing, revitalizing local economies, reducing segregation), Urban Renewal did not necessarily live up to these ideals.  Called “major urban surgery” that left in its wake many questions:

•  
  • What happened to the poor whose housing was destroyed?
  • How to reconcile Federal goals with local goals in redevelopment?
  • What was really the effect on a city’s existing economic structure?

The biggest gain from the program was that it enabled many inner cities to compete with their suburban challengers:

a. In many places, inner city retailing was “saved”…thus providing  an anchor for other types of development.

b. Redevelopment, in some places, meant the revitalization of  existing cultural and historic resources…buildings, harbors,

  parks, etc.

c. It also promoted the gentrification instead of destruction of

      the existing housing structure, where suitable, often because

      of “historic” interest  (Victorian Village in Columbus, Ohio). But

      who lives in these gentrified neighborhoods? 

“Real” community development as we know it came about with the passage of the 1974 Community Development Act.  This Act has funded a number of programs which have had somewhat more positive results than Urban Renewal:

1. Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs) – an  entitlement program that gave all communities an opportunity

      to receive Federal money to help them accomplish service

  provision to the poor.

      * Called “block grant” because when a community applied

            for this money, it was given without “strings”…no

            requirements.

      * Used mainly to “build” facilities such as playgrounds,

            centers for the handicapped, drainage facilities, housing

   rehab, historic area revitalization, etc.

      * Less usually used to provide “services” since

            communities’ fear of Federal money “drying up” would

   leave them responsible for continuing to provide these

   services without the money to do so. 

2. As part of the grant process for Community Development

      funds, the applicant had to file a Housing Assistance Plan (HAP)

  that spelled out how the community was dealing with its

  housing needs. 

3. Urban Development Action Grants – a program that assisted a

  community that met certain criteria in terms of poverty,

      unemployment, age of housing stock, slowness of employment

  growth, etc., to acquire and clear sites that could be used to

      help promote economic development.  This was a competitive

      grant.  Program phased out under the Reagan Admin. 

4. Urban Homesteading – another grant program to help promote

      home ownership.  What did this involve? 

5. Low interest loan programs to help commercial areas redevelop

      without tearing down the neighborhood.

THE HOUSING QUESTION

Much of Urban Renewal efforts and Community Development efforts have focused on “housing”.  Why is housing so important?

• By far, housing occupies more land in a community than any other land use.
• Housing means neighborhoods, in most cases and this is a unit near and dear to people’s hearts…where they spend most of their time.
• The provision of housing is usually the largest item in a family’s budget.
• A house is usually the most expensive/valuable possession a person acquires in their lifetime.
• The major item in a person’s estate when she/he dies is a house.

Property ownership is a right that our founding fathers defended to the death.  As such, much public policy is aimed at furthering property ownership…meaning housing. 

Preferential treatment is granted to those constructing, owning, or occupying housing in many ways: 

•  
  • Subsidization of rent – Section 8 of the 1974 Housing Act aimed at those with low incomes.
  • Benefits granted to developers who build housing for low income people (either voluntarily or through inclusionary zoning reqs.) through “density bonuses”.
  • Benefits to income tax liability by being able to subtract the interest paid on a home loan from this liability.
  • Deferment of capital gains tax if profit on the sale of a house is “reinvested” in another house.
  
  

PLANNING FOR HOUSING

What role does the community play in the provision of housing, which is a “private market” decision and activity?

1. To provide the physical “infrastructure” needed such as streets,

  water and sewer lines, etc.

2. To designate areas suitable for housing and provide amenities

  such as appropriate subdivision regulations, parks, schools, etc. 

What can a community do to provide low-to-moderate income housing?

1. Provide the infrastructure as stated above.

2. Apply appropriate land use controls to encourage the building

  of low to moderate income housing (inclusionary zoning) and

  to prohibit destruction or alteration (“tear downs”) of affordable

  housing in existing neighborhoods.

3. Seek out state and Federal subsidies/grants for such housing.

4. Not to enact laws that obstruct the building of such housing,

  despite the pressure to do so.

5. Take a pro-active approach in providing group homes.

6. Some communities institute “rent controls”…more radical way. 

Problems with how to assess the “quality” of existing housing.  U.S. Census used such terms as “deteriorated” or “dilapidated”…very subjective and have been replaced with more quantifiable means such as the existence of working kitchens and bathrooms. 

Standards for determining what percentage of a person’s income should be used for the provision of “housing”…conventional wisdom suggests not more than 1/3^rd of the net income should be so used. 

Vacancy rates…what do these tell you? 

• 1. Growth management, as a specific objective for communities, first appeared in the 1960s and 1970s: several terms emerged that tried to capture the essence of what communities were trying to do:

• 1. Growth management, as a specific objective for communities, first appeared in the 1960s and 1970s: several terms emerged that tried to capture the essence of what communities were trying to do:

•  

  * growth management – management (by means of the 4 factors identified in #1, above) without any intention of limiting growth or community population size

•  

  * growth control – implied that growth would not only be managed but limited in some way…community population “cap”

      * no growth – intent was to stop growth entirely