|
In Perspective
<br />Sustainable industrial development changes many things about
<br />industrial zoning, but it cannot change everything. Impacts can
<br />be minimized, but every human activity ultimately has some
<br />ecological footprint. Pursuing sustainable development is not a
<br />cookbook activity, but a highly creative public and private
<br />enterprise. With a light regulatory hand that encourages
<br />innovation, planners can help their communities to achieve
<br />environmental efficiencies through wisely considered mixed-use
<br />development. Communities can attract desirable, forward-
<br />looking, low-impact industrial development by using the
<br />magnetic power of progressive businesses to attract other
<br />progressive businesses, without leaving a legacy of substantial
<br />environmental costs for future generations to pay.
<br />
<br />Albuquerque's
<br />Growing Pains
<br />
<br />Are urban growth boundaries effective when adopted by a single
<br />jurisdiction rather than employed regionally? Do they work alone,
<br />or do they require complementary growth management policies?
<br />Officials in Albuquerque, New Mexico, are asking these questions.
<br />Plans to establish an urban growth boundary and make the city
<br />"more livable" have been met with skepticism, anger, and
<br />confusion by stakeholders from the public and private arenas.
<br />Developers are first to scoffat the idea of such a boundary, saying
<br />planned communities on the city's fringe will be neglected. Some
<br />public officials fear housing costs inside the city will escalate while
<br />areas outside the boundary suffer from uncontrolled growth and
<br />inadequate infrastructure systems.
<br /> Urban growth boundaries set limits on development beyond
<br />a specified area and work at protecting valuable open space or
<br />agricultural land outside the boundary. Such limits can promote
<br />infill development and increase housing densities within the
<br />boundary. This may lead to the revitalization of established
<br />neighborhoods, stronger downtowns, and decreased reliance on
<br />automobiles. Urban growth boundaries have turned cities like
<br />Portland, Oregon, into sustainable urban centers.
<br /> Oregon's success with controlled development, however, is
<br />attributed to more than urban growth boundaries, say Randall
<br />Arendt and James Constantine in the Spring/Summer 1996
<br />issue of LandDevdopment. Its growth boundaries are part of a
<br />larger network of land-use and development policies, called
<br />"prodevelopment measures." These measures make it easier for
<br />developers to conduct business by facilitating an efficient land-
<br />use appellate system. They include the presumption of
<br />
<br />Zoning News is a monthly newsletter published by the American Planning Association.
<br />Subscriptions are available for $50 (U.S.) and $65 (foreign). Frank S. So. Executive Director;
<br />William R. Klein, Director o£Reseatch.
<br />Zoning Newt is produced at APA, Jim Schwab and Mike Davidson, Editors~ Chris Burke, Fay
<br />Dolnick, Kimberly Gester, Sanjay Jeer, Megan Lewis, Marya Morris, Becki Retzlaff, Martin
<br />Roupe, Jason Wittenberg. Reporters; Cynthia Cheski, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and
<br />Production.
<br />Copyright 01998 by American Planning Association, 122 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1600,
<br />Chicago, 1L 60603. The American PJanning Association has headqt~arters offices at 1776
<br />Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036.
<br />All tights reserved. No part oftbis publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by
<br />an}' means, electronic or mccbanicah including photocopying, recording, or hy an)' information
<br />storage and retrieval system, without pcrmisfion in writing frnm thc American Planning
<br />Associatinn.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber
<br />
<br /> buildability inside the growth boundary and a 120-day approval
<br /> for streamlining permitting. The implication is that a gro~a, th
<br /> boundary by itself is not enough.
<br /> Proponents of Albuquerque's growth boundary disagree,
<br /> however, and argue that growth boundaries alone can increase
<br /> the quality and amount of economic development in the city.
<br /> They also claim that costs of extending city services to the urban
<br /> fringe would no longer be placed on Albuquerque taxpayers ifa
<br /> growth boundary were in place.
<br /> Ned Farquhar, executive director for 1000 Friends of New
<br /> Mexico, which advocates conservation planning for
<br /> Albuquerque, says his organization is not suggesting that the
<br /> city adopt an urban growth boundary. Rather, it would like to
<br /> see the city establish an urban service boundary, which he says is
<br /> a "friendlier" planning concept largely misunderstood and often
<br /> misrepresented, perhaps intentionally, by the city's public
<br /> officials and media.
<br /> Urban service boundaries differ from growth boundaries in that
<br />they designate beforehand where a city will grow and invest in the
<br />future. Growth boundaries make development illegal beyond a set
<br />area. Service boundaries allow development outside that area, but
<br />the developments are not entided to the sewers, water, and other
<br />services supported by urban taxpayers. "Opponents of the issue
<br />keep calling this an 'urban growth boundary' just so they can have
<br />an excuse to kill it," says Farquhar. He cites Denver as a model for
<br />the successful implementation of an urban service boundary, and
<br />notes that "after decades of sprawl, Denver has reduced its area of
<br />urban development and improved the economy and quality of life
<br />for everyone."
<br /> Albuquerque's surrounding jurisdictions appear unwilling
<br />to participate in growth or service boundary initiatives,
<br />postponing indefinitely a regional approach to conservation
<br />planning. California also leaves urban growth boundary
<br />decisions up to local jurisdictions, and they have responded
<br />with enthusiasm. The most recent voter approval ratings for
<br />the boundaries in that state were Novato County's 70
<br />percent in November 1997 and Windsor County's 72
<br />percent in January of this year.
<br /> Two techniques for growth boundary implementation are
<br />applied in California. The first involves a three-step voter
<br />approval process that includes mapping out the urban growth
<br />boundary and incorporating it into the comprehensive plan,
<br />securing the growth boundary through initiative or referendum,
<br />and working with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure that the
<br />boundary's goals and objectives are met. Complementary
<br />policies are also considered to protect the greenbelt around the
<br />boundary and promote development within it.
<br /> The second technique used by California jurisdictions
<br />involves establishing an urban growth boundary by council
<br />action. The steps are the same, in that a growth boundary is
<br />mapped out and arrangements are made with neighboring
<br />jurisdictions. However, rather than voting for the boundary, it
<br />is secured by tough planning requirements that limit the
<br />regularity and extent to which it can be modified.
<br /> New Mexico jurisdictions remain indifferent at best,
<br />however. A staff member of the Albuquerque city council says
<br />many city officials are simply not familiar enough with the issue
<br />and its implications to make a decision that will suit developers,
<br />elected officials, and residents alike. So until the political and
<br />economic climates favor such ideas, urban growth and urban
<br />service boundaries in New Mexico will remain just a concept for
<br />the conservationists. M/c/md Davidso,
<br />
<br />
<br />
|