Including Affordable Housing in Smart Growth and New Urbanist Development

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Including Affordable Housing in Smart Growth and New Urbanist Development H Seaside, Florida The Seaside Institute Balanced Residential Communities: Including Affordable Housing in Smart Growth and New Urbanist Development by jaimie ross rowth management and smart growth working poor. This means the workforce must principles can result in historic and open commute to the new community from outside, HGspace preservation, and new towns built with and the schools within the new community do not traditional neighborhood design, complete with mixed have the benefit of diversity. It also means that uses and new schools. Smart growth and new local governments (which permitted the urbanism advocates avow affordable housing integral development of a new community without to their models of development.1 According to the inclusion of affordable housing) have fallen Smart Growth Network and the National behind in meeting their growth management Neighborhood Coalition, “smart growth is not responsibility for affordable housing.4 achieved if new developments feature a town square, mixed uses, grid street networks, and front porches in the “new Large scale developers and the developers of new urbanist urbanist” tradition, but fail to plan for affordable housing communities assure local government elected officials, opportunities”2 Unfortunately, the reality is that Florida’s large staff, and the public, that the entire spectrum of income scale developments and new urbanist communities can boast groups will be able to live in the new community. They little or no affordable housing.3 intend to do this by including residential units that range from luxury single-family homes to modest townhouses and Development patterns throughout Florida continue to apartments. But those smaller detached homes, result in large tracts of land in suburban or rural areas townhomes, and apartments that started out as developed in a manner that creates small towns or villages “affordable” become unaffordable in short order due to to the exclusion of low to moderate income families and the rapidly appreciating land values. Page 9 HOUSING NEWS NETWORK What should local governments do to address the issue of lower income families, with long term land use restriction producing and preserving affordability in the context of agreements to ensure those homes remain affordable, we will smart growth and new urbanism? The continue to see large scale development, answer lies in a complement of financing especially those developed using the model of and land use tools to develop and preserve Although some Floridians are new urbanism and traditional neighborhood affordable, or what is now often referred to reluctant to believe it, we need only design, exacerbating the need for as “workforce,” housing. At the forefront look to California to affordable housing. for large scale development should be a understand the imminent balanced residential ordinance, commonly Large scale developments that fail to affordability crisis our state is known as inclusionary zoning. include affordable housing make the local Inclusionary zoning is a land use tool that facing. Florida is a sunshine state government’s job of meeting its housing uses the opportunity of growth and a strong surrounded by water on three element requirements even more difficult, real estate market to obtain private sector sides. It is amazing that our land as developers of large tracts of land use up participation in its efforts to produce and costs have remained as low as they sites, which could otherwise be available preserve affordable housing and create for affordable housing and create greater have for so long. The change is balanced residential communities. demands for housing the employees happening at lightening speed. needed to serve the businesses, a victim of their own An ever increasing number of local entertainment facilities, and public success governments and housing services required by the residents in the advocates are abandoning the goal new community. New urbanism and traditional neighborhood of meeting the needs of the very low design have been a marketing success story. The deficit of affordable housing This is a win for smart growth—open space is income population because they just plaguing virtually every local government preserved, less land is used per family, and can’t see how it is possible. They in Florida is a result of market failure. pedestrian friendly neighborhoods are reluctantly opine that the best they For the most part, employment in Florida is high. It is an unfortunate fact that created where families are in walking or can hope for is to house the low biking distance to shopping, parks, and many mothers and fathers in Florida are paid professionals, such as teachers schools. But the very success of traditional holding multiple jobs to make ends meet. neighborhood design and its desirability and firefighters. Many have given So why do over 730,000 low-income hard results in the failure to meet its stated goal of up on housing for service workers, working Florida families pay more than 5 providing affordable housing. who make up the bulk of half their income on housing? It is a combination of factors, but most directly Florida’s workforce. Robert Davis, pioneer of new urbanism and it is that jobs, including low paid traditional neighborhood design, thought he professional jobs, do not pay a wage high was including affordable housing within Seaside, a beautiful enough to meet housing costs associated with real property award-winning neo-traditional new urbanist development in the values that are escalating at a stupendous rate. Florida Panhandle. In addition to large homes, his Seaside a land use remedy long development included tiny bungalows, which were intended to provide workforce housing. But the desirability of the new town overdue in florida resulted in those bungalows being sold and rented at astronomical prices, in reach of only the wealthy. Inclusionary zoning is gaining interest from local governments throughout Florida.6 Most are looking at More than 20 years after Seaside, large scale residential models from around the nation that apply to developments developments, including those developed in the style of new with units of 25 or 50 as a threshold. Over 30 years old, and urbanism, continue to make the mistake of trying to address certainly the most well known inclusionary zoning ordinance affordability by providing a mix of unit types, including is the Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit ordinance of townhomes and apartments or smaller single-family units with Montgomery County, Maryland. There are over 100 the expectation that these units will serve lower income families. inclusionary zoning ordinances in California. Inclusionary It won’t work. Density does not equate to affordability. Unless a zoning ordinances in the northeast part of the nation apply certain percentage of the residential units are set aside for serving to urban developments with as few as six units. In Aspen, Page 10 Colorado, the development of even one communities are long term market rate unit requires the affordability and administration. When development of one affordable unit. A Although inclusionary zoning ordinances must an affordable product is included in an number of local governments be tailored at the local level to reflect the otherwise unaffordable area, throughout Florida are in the process development patterns, market conditions, and appreciation inflates at a substantially of studying, drafting, or adopting affordable housing needs in a particular greater rate. Once a local government inclusionary zoning ordinances based jurisdiction, all inclusionary zoning ordinances has adopted and implemented a upon these existing models. have certain common elements—at a balanced residential ordinance, it is minimum, they address the following: imperative that a long-term period of Inclusionary zoning is not a zoning affordability accompany the • A threshold number of market rate units category; it is a land use regulation that activates the inclusionary development of the home. Long term that requires a certain number of requirement, with a corresponding affordability requirements call for affordable housing units to be built percentage of affordable units (at varying administration; it is usually in conjunction with the development degrees of affordability) required; incumbent upon the local government of market rate units. “Inclusionary to income certify potential renters or zoning” was coined to reflect the • A requirement that the affordable units are home buyers, enforce the resale intent of the ordinance: to comparable in quality and aesthetics to restrictions (usually a formula which counteract the effects of the market rate units; provides a fair and reasonable exclusionary zoning. Exclusionary appreciation to protect the wealth • Incentives to assist the private sector in zoning is historically characterized building facet of home ownership, but providing the affordable units, such as a by large lot subdivisions and density bonus; avoids windfall), and provide a minimum square foot ordinances pipeline of qualified home buyers for that make it difficult to develop • A provision for payment in-lieu when the the affordable units. affordable housing. Affordable nature of the development makes it in conclusion housing is defined in terms of the practicably infeasible to include affordable income of the families buying or units; renting the housing and the There is no doubt that land development percentage of their income spent for • A housing trust fund as the depository for regulations that permit smart growth and mortgage or lease payments. It is the payments in-lieu, and a mechanism new urbanist communities is a good and for using those dollars to promote generally accepted that low-income positive thing. Developers are creating affordable housing; families (those earning less than 80 beautiful built environments, that percent of the area median income) • An affordability period. One of the most emphasize old fashioned neighborhoods should not have housing costs that critical elements in an inclusionary housing with a mix of uses, built around parks exceed 30 percent of their income. ordinance is long term affordability; and and pedestrian friendly spaces.
Recommended publications
  • 1 Can Public Procurement Aid The
    Can public procurement aid the implementation of smart specialization strategies? Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitiaa*, Edurne Magrob, Elvira Uyarrac, Kieron Flanaganc a.- Deusto Business School, University of Deusto, Donostia-San Sebastian (Spain) b.- Orkestra-Basque Institute of Competitiveness, University of Deusto, Donostia-San Sebastian (Spain) c.- Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester (United Kingdom) * Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract In recent decades sub-national regions have become ever more important as spaces for policy making. The current focus on research and innovation for smart specialisation strategies is the latest manifestation of this trend. By putting PPI processes at the core of regional and local development initiatives to support innovation, governments can go beyond priority setting to become active stakeholders engaged in entrepreneurial discovery processes. In this paper we offer a new conceptualization of how such smart specialisation strategies, as an example of a sub- national innovation policy, can help articulate demand for innovation. The paper presents an evolutionary framework that relates regional specialisation processes with the scale and scope of the demand associated to that specialisation. We identify four different roles for governments to be played, depending on the availability of local capabilities and the scale of the chosen priorities: government as a lead user, government as an innovation catalyst,
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Planning Practice in the Age of Transit-Oriented Development by Ian Robinson Carlton a Dissertation Submitted in Partial
    Transit Planning Practice in the Age of Transit-Oriented Development By Ian Robinson Carlton A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in City & Regional Planning in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Daniel Chatman, Chair Professor Robert Cervero Professor Dwight Jaffee Fall 2013 © Copyright by Ian Robinson Carlton 2013 All Rights Reserved Abstract Transit Planning Practice in the Age of Transit-Oriented Development by Ian Robinson Carlton Doctor of Philosophy in City & Regional Planning University of California, Berkeley Professor Daniel Chatman, Chair Globally, urban development near transit stations has long been understood to be critical to transit’s success primarily because it can contribute to ridership and improve the efficiency of transit investments. In the United States in particular, fixed-guideway transit’s land use-shaping capability has been an important justification and goal for transit investment. In fact, today’s U.S. federal funding policies increasingly focus on achieving transit-oriented real estate development near new transit infrastructure. However, the widespread implementation of transit and land use coordination practices has been considered an uphill battle. The academic literature suggests the most effective practice may be for U.S. transit planners to locate transit stations where pre-existing conditions are advantageous for real estate development or transit investments can generate the political will to dramatically alter local conditions to make them amenable to real estate development. However, prior to this study, no research had investigated the influence of real estate development considerations on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Smart Growth: a Primer
    WHY SMART GROWTH: A PRIMER International City/County Management Association with Geoff Anderson ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to acknowledge the efforts of Geoffrey Anderson of the U.S. Environ­ mental Protection Agency (EPA). Without his assistance this primer would not exist. In addition, Mike Siegel, Gary Lawrence, Don Chen, Reid Ewing, Paul Alsenas, reviewers at the National Association of Counties and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), and many others provided invaluable suggestions and expertise. A final thank you to Kendra Briechle for helping to pull it all together. About the Smart Growth Network The Smart Growth Network is a coalition of private sector, public sector, and non- governmental partner organizations seeking to create smart growth in neighborhoods, communities, and regions across the United States. Network Partners include the U.S. EPA's Urban and Economic Development Division, ICMA, Center for Neighborhood Technology, Congress for the New Urbanism, Joint Center for Sustainable Communi­ ties, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Northeast-Midwest Institute, State of Maryland, Surface Transportation Policy Project, Sustainable Communities Network, and Urban Land Institute. About the International City/County Management Association ICMA is the professional and educational association for appointed administrators and assistant administrators serving cities, towns, villages, boroughs, townships, coun­ ties, and regional councils. ICMA serves as the organizational home of the Smart Growth Network and runs the Network’s membership program. ICMA helps local governments create sustainable communities through smart growth activities and related programs. For more information on the Smart Growth Network, contact ICMA or visit the Smart Growth Website at http://www.smartgrowth.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Growth and Economic Success: Benefits for Real Estate Developers, Investors, Businesses, and Local Governments
    United States December 2012 Environmental Protection Agency www.epa.gov/smartgrowth SMART GROWTH AND ECONOMIC SUCCESS: BENEFITS FOR REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS, INVESTORS, BUSINESSES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS Office of Sustainable Communities Smart Growth Program (Distributed at 1/14/13 Sustainable Thurston Task Force meeting) Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the EPA’s Office of Sustainable Communities with the assistance of Renaissance Planning Group under contract number EP-W-11-009/010/11. Principal Staff Contacts: Melissa Kramer and Lee Sobel Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. Cover photos (left to right, top to bottom): Barracks Row in Washington, D.C., courtesy of Lee Sobel; TRAX light rail in Sandy, Utah, courtesy of Melissa Kramer; Mission Creek Senior Community in San Francisco, California, courtesy of Alan Karchmer and Mercy Housing Inc. (Distributed at 1/14/13 Sustainable Thurston Task Force meeting) Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ i I. Economic Advantages of Smart Growth Strategies .............................................................................. 1 II. Economic Advantages of Compact Development ................................................................................. 4 A. Higher Revenue Generation per Acre of Land .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Growth Guide
    LOCAL GOVERNMENT CLIMATE AND ENERGY STRATEGY SERIES Smart Growth A Guide to Developing and Implementing Greenhouse Gas Reductions Programs Community Planning and Design U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 2011 EPA’s Local Government Climate and Energy Strategy Series The Local Government Climate and Energy Strategy Series provides a comprehensive, straightforward overview of green- house gas (GHG) emissions reduction strategies for local governments. Topics include energy efficiency, transportation, community planning and design, solid waste and materials management, and renewable energy. City, county, territorial, tribal, and regional government staff, and elected officials can use these guides to plan, implement, and evaluate their climate change mitigation and energy projects. Each guide provides an overview of project benefits, policy mechanisms, investments, key stakeholders, and other imple- mentation considerations. Examples and case studies highlighting achievable results from programs implemented in communities across the United States are incorporated throughout the guides. While each guide stands on its own, the entire series contains many interrelated strategies that can be combined to create comprehensive, cost-effective programs that generate multiple benefits. For example, efforts to improve energy efficiency can be combined with transportation and community planning programs to reduce GHG emissions, decrease energy and transportation costs, improve air quality and public health, and enhance quality of life. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Sprawl Vs. Smart Growth
    By Spr Elizabeth Humstone Vermont Forum on Sprawl Smart Growth: 2 These necessities typically i housing, clothing, furniture, a vary in generosity from state to Hampshire allows a $50,000 while in Texas, the entire home less of value. ow governments choose to invest public might inadvertently be supporting sprawl in the resources can play a key role in economic develop- Green Mountain State. To help inform policy ment and growth patterns. Decisions on road con- makers, VSGC comprehensively analyzed the Hstruction, sewer extensions, school siting, and the state’s investments, policies, and programs, identi- like can make all the difference in creating healthy, fying those that supported smart growth and those sustainable communities. Unfortunately, economic that encouraged sprawl. VSGC’s findings are development policy is often crafted or carried out instructive for states that want to formulate policy in ways that unwittingly support sprawl—low den- that minimizes costs and promotes economic sity, disconnected, auto-dependent development— development, affordable housing, transportation, which can impose sizable costs on communities and downtown revitalization. and states. The Vermont Smart Growth Collaborative Sprawl vs. Smart Growth: (VSGC), a coalition of ten nonprofit organiza- Costs and Benefits tions, was concerned that state and local policies While there are varying definitions of sprawl 10 Summer 2004 awlvs. The Power of the Public Purse include an allowance of and personal items, but state. For example, New homestead exemption, estead is exempt, regard- and smart growth (see sidebar on page 15), there and reducing the ability to walk to schools, are several generally accepted features that distin- libraries, stores, and jobs.
    [Show full text]
  • Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide
    Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide STUDY PREPARED BY CENTER FOR URBAN POLICY RESEARCH EDWARD J. BLOUSTEIN SCHOOL OF PLANNING & PUBLIC POLICY RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY with the participation of THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR SMART GROWTH RESEARCH AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND and SCHOOR DEPALMA MANALAPAN, NEW JERSEY STUDY PREPARED FOR NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (NJDCA) DIVISION OF CODES AND STANDARDS and NEW JERSEY MEADOWLANDS COMMISSION (NJMC) NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF SMART GROWTH (NJOSG) June, 2006 DRAFT—NOT FOR QUOTATION ii CONTENTS Part One: Introduction and Synthesis of Findings and Recommendations Chapter 1. Smart Growth and Infill: Challenge, Opportunity, and Best Practices……………………………………………………………...…..2 Part Two: Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide Section I. General Provisions…………………….…………………………….....33 II. Definitions and Development and Area Designations ………….....36 III. Land Acquisition………………………………………………….……40 IV. Financing for Infill Development ……………………………..……...43 V. Property Taxes……………………………………………………….....52 VI. Procedure………………………………………………………………..57 VII. Design……………………………………………………………….…..68 VIII. Zoning…………………………………………………………………...79 IX. Subdivision and Site Plan…………………………………………….100 X. Documents to be Submitted……………………………………….…135 XI. Design Details XI-1 Lighting………………………………………………….....145 XI-2 Signs………………………………………………………..156 XI-3 Landscaping…………………………………………….....167 Part Three: Background on Infill Development: Challenges
    [Show full text]
  • Affordable Housing and Smart Growth Making the Connection
    Affordable Housing and Smart Growth Making the Connection National Neighborhood Coalition Principal Author Danielle Arigoni Publisher National Neighborhood Coalition Copyeditor Robin Surratt Design Eastern Research Group Layout Janice Clark Printing Doyle Printing For additional copies of this report, contact the Environmental Protection Agency’s Development, Community, and Environment Division at 202-260-2750. AFFORDABLE HOUSING and SMART GROWTH Making the Connection A PUBLICATION OF THE SMART GROWTH NETWORK SUBGROUP ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING Members American Planning Association Enterprise Foundation Environmental Law Institute Fannie Mae Housing Assistance Council International City/County Management Association Local Initiatives Support Corporation National Congress for Community and Economic Development National Housing Institute National Low Income Housing Coalition National Neighborhood Coalition Northeast-Midwest Institute Smart Growth America U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Urban Land Institute Washington, D.C. 2001 National Neighborhood Coalition Affordable Housing Subgroup Convenors Smart Growth Network In 1996, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency joined with several non-profit and government organizations to form the Smart Growth Network (SGN). The Network was formed in response to increasing community concerns about the need for new ways to grow that boost the economy, protect the environment, and enhance community vitality. The Network's partners include environmental groups, historic preservation organizations, professional
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Growth and Economic Success: Investing in Infill Development
    United States February 2014 Environmental Protection www.epa.gov/smartgrowth Agency SMART GROWTH AND ECONOMIC SUCCESS: INVESTING IN INFILL DEVELOPMENT Office of Sustainable Communities Smart Growth Program Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Sustainable Communities with the assistance of Renaissance Planning Group and RCLCO under contract number EP-W-11-009/010/11. Christopher Coes (Smart Growth America); Alex Barron (EPA Office of Policy); Dennis Guignet and Robin Jenkins (EPA National Center for Environmental Economics); and Kathleen Bailey, Matt Dalbey, Megan Susman, and John Thomas (EPA Office of Sustainable Communities) provided editorial reviews. EPA Project Leads: Melissa Kramer and Lee Sobel Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. This paper is part of a series of documents on smart growth and economic success. Other papers in the series can be found at www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/economic_success.htm. Cover photos and credits: La Valentina in Sacramento, California, courtesy of Bruce Damonte; Small-lot infill in Washington, D.C., courtesy of EPA; The Fitzgerald in Baltimore, courtesy of The Bozzuto Group; and The Maltman Bungalows in Los Angeles, courtesy of Civic Enterprise Development. Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ i I. Introduction .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Growth Criteria Form
    SMART GROWTH PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ACT SMART GROWTH CRITERIA FORM Applicants must address how a particular Criterion is met or why it is not “relevant” to the proposed project. Applicants must show how facets of their project relate to the Criteria by noting “Yes:”, “No:”, or “NR:” (for Not Relevant) followed by a brief explanation. For a Project which does not satisfy Smart Growth criteria or compliance of the Project with such criteria is considered to be impracticable (a “No:” answer), sufficient information must be provided to support justification for approval of funding. Project Name: Project Number: Project Address: Applicant/Sponsor: Project Description: Criterion (1): “To advance projects for the use, maintenance or improvement of existing infrastructure.” Criterion (2): “To advance projects located in municipal centers.” 1 5/2019 Criterion (3): “To advance projects in developed areas or areas designated for concentrated infill development in a municipally approved comprehensive land use plan, local waterfront revitalization plan and/or brownfield opportunity area plan.” Criterion (4): “To protect, preserve and enhance the state’s resources, including agricultural land, forests, surface and groundwater, air quality, recreation and open space, scenic areas, and significant historic and archaeological resources.” Criterion (5): “To foster mixed land uses and compact development, downtown revitalization, brownfield redevelopment, the enhancement of beauty in public spaces, the diversity and affordability of housing in proximity
    [Show full text]
  • SMART GROWTH Fernando Costa, David Crossley, Mike Brennan, and Greg Baker
    SMART GROWTH Fernando Costa, David Crossley, Mike Brennan, and Greg Baker In recent years, the term "smart growth" has become increasingly popular as public officials around the country have sought long-term, sustainable solutions to the urgent social, economic, and environmental issues that face our cities and metropolitan areas. A wide variety of national organizations, ranging from the Sierra Club to the National Association of Home Builders, have adopted policy statements that explicitly favor some form of smart growth. From coast to coast, many states have provided leadership on growth management issues, even as they have reaffirmed that the responsibility for resolving those issues lies mainly at the local level. The American Planning Association will consider, at its Chicago Conference in April 2002, the following definition: Smart Growth is the planning, design and development and revitalization of our communities to promote community and equity, to create a sense of place and to preserve our natural as well as cultural resources. Smart Growth enhances _ecological integrity over both the short and long term, and improves quality of life for all by expanding the range of transportation, employment and housing choices in the region in a fiscally responsible manner. Source: Draft 4, Policy Guide on Smart Growth, September 7, 2001. Available on the APA website, www.planning.org; or from the APA's offices in Washington, D.C. In Texas, some municipalities have adopted smart growth as the theme for their efforts to revitalize distressed neighborhoods and control suburban sprawl. For example, the City of Austin has attracted national attention with its innovative Smart Growth Initiative, even hosting the Urban Land Institute's 1998 conference on smart growth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Big Tent of Growth Management: Smart Growth As a Movement
    Policies for Managing Urban Growth and Landscape Change: A Key to Conservation in the 21st Century THE BIG TENT OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT: SMART GROWTH AS A MOVEMENT Edward G. Goetz1 ABSTRACT—Growth management policies in the U.S. have failed to gain significant political support in many regions, limiting efforts to manage development patterns and protect natural resources. The Smart Growth movement has brought new voices into the debate over growth management and has provided a “big tent” under which transportation groups, environmentalists, advocates for affordable housing, and neighborhood activists have combined efforts to affect land policy. Although this has broadened political support for growth management, the Smart Growth movement still faces impor- tant challenges in unifying and mobilizing its diverse constituency. Pinpointing the origins of the Smart Growth movement is dif- (NRDC) and the Surface Transportation Policy Project ficult. Some argue that Smart Growth stems from the entire (STPP) jointly developed what they called the Smart Growth history of growth management efforts, going back as far as the Toolkit to assist local and state governments in producing Supreme Court’s legitimization of zoning (Burchell et al. walkable and transit-accessible development. In 1996, the 2000). From this perspective, Smart Growth is merely a label U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) joined with for a repackaged assemblage of previous growth management nonprofit and government organizations to create the Smart techniques and is an evolutionary stage in the development of Growth Network (SGN). Members of the SGN include a growth management approaches. A competing perspective is range of interest groups concerned with issues that range that Smart Growth brings together existing strategies in a new from the environment and historic preservation to real estate way, under the banner of a different set of growth manage- development and transportation.
    [Show full text]