Urban Sprawl and How States Are Dealing With the Issue

Land Use Planning Policies and Urban Sprawl IMPORTANCE Land planning for distribution has progressed manifolds in the past century. Increase in the number of communities in the country raises the demand for urban development. Developments are often referred as revolutionary plans meant for better living. However, by the end of the 20th century perception of better living means away from the mainstream urbanism. Communities shifted to new areas with open space, tranquility and yet with almost the same kind of amenities as those in the urban areas [Williams, 2000].

Urban spread has become a major concern for various reasons. According to some urban sprawl should be controlled through extensive planning campaigns. Proponents of this group argue that the open spaces for farmland, once considered an off-limits arena for the urban commuters, today with the help of developers has slowly encroached on farm designated land. Opponents to sprawl are quick to point out that the zoning rules, higher taxes and fewer consumer choices all contribute to sprawl.

It is the duty of the government to devise effective plans to control sprawl. The federal government is responsible for limiting the gradual undertaking of this new breed of consumers [Gordon and Richardson, 1997]. Yet again, people feel the future of farmland is threatened by sprawl since the nation depends on farmland for food and sustenance. If sprawl is not contained in time it will likely decrease farmland for agricultural purposes. According to statistics 39 largest metropolitan areas have already grown more then 22% in the last 3 decades.

Americans find it more feasible to relocate to suburbs then to the heavily congested urban cities. Although these suburbs are difficult places to live and do business in, they feel they can sacrifice such a life style for the peace and tranquility [Oliver, 1998]. Subsequently, urban sprawl has become a great concern for environmentalists, federal government, urban developers and planners. First of all environmentalists propose that the U.S. is seeing decreasing in land coverage each year.

At this rate of urban sprawl people will have more space to live in but lesser space for recreation, natural habitat for wild life and lesser land for agriculture. Secondly, federal government is concerned with the kind of control they have for stopping sprawl. Until now federal policies have not been effective. By definition sprawls is unregulated spread of urbanism. Unregulated means there is no controlling authority to oversee the kind of environment people create when they relocate to a different place of their choice.

Since all utilities are privately owned it is difficult for the federal government to stop them from going out of planned cities to these suburbs. Thirdly, developers and planners are concerned about sprawl because they raise the problem of planned urban centers. They leave less choice for the developers and planners to set up habitable place within the city limits. Since developers depend on commuters to provide funds for projects, most of these projects have to be relocated to suit the consumers.

Even if developers and planners want to erect urban projects they cannot do so without funding. RESEARCH QUESTION: The gravity of the problem of sprawl hence raises the following research question: How effective have land use planning policies been on the ability of states to control sprawl? IMPORTANCE Sprawl has become an important topic for discussion because of the controversial nature of its existence. States like Los Angeles and New York are finding it difficult to control sprawl which absorb development budgets.

The study is important for developers, enabling them to view how other states are managing their sprawl and to encourage them to follow similar action plans. The following researcher will identify states that have been able to implement comprehensive growth management program. They are finding it to be an effective solution for controlling sprawl.

The states that are able to control sprawl are keeping taxes down, helping the environment and aiding in the economic growth of inner cities by easing traffic congestion and slowing the development of open space and farmland. Through non-peer reviews the researcher have come across studies indicating there are solutions for the problem of urban sprawl. However these require the attention and action of the federal government.

The researcher plans to review several historical cases through peer reviews to show how land use policies can enable the states to control sprawl. The question remains is how the effective are the government's controlling programs. The researcher found on its own land use policies has been effective. However, the government's controlling policies lack in their scope which is why land use policies have proved ineffective. LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Before one move on to sprawl and its containment by the government, one must define what actually urban sprawl is.

Some experts define sprawl as low urban growth with low residents living on the outskirts of the urban areas, auto dependent and often spread out from existing communities. "Research also describes urban sprawl as random development characterized by poor accessibility among related land uses, such as housing, jobs, and services like schools and hospitals. Sprawling development can occur in rural and urban areas and can encompass residential, commercial, and industrial zones." [Government Accounting Office, 1999]. Land use planning according to peer reviews requires continuous incorporation of new ideas and techniques.

Without this, the traditional mapped land use design cannot function as a charter for urban development. The classification of land use and planning require management as well. The local and federal governments are the main contributors to development of infrastructure in this genre. Local plans for instance channel through councils and ministers to the federal government. They are then projected to the federal government for approval. It is at this stage that one come to see the deterioration of effective control.

Since there are no rigid rules for contemporary local planning, they are taken as a guiding measure [not controlling] to fulfill administrative purposes [Ewing, 1997]. Planning regulations Edward J. Kaiser and David R. Godschalk [1995] indicate urban growth require extensive planning to map land use. They believe the results of their studies of 38 states indicate planning is the platform for the formation of community living. If an urban area is well planned, consensus among community members will enable urban growth in a regulated manner. Participation among community members would become easier.

Kaiser and Godschalk study show an acute influence of "the federal Standard City Planning Enabling Act of 1928" earlier the previous century. Peer reviews indicated that the Act was responsible for shaping and enabling many states' government in urban planning matters. "However, the Act left many planners and public officials confused about the difference between a master plan and a zoning ordinance, so that hundreds of communities adopted "zoning plans" without having created comprehensive plans as the basis for zoning.

Because the Act also did not make clear the importance of comprehensiveness or define the essential elements of physical development, no consensus about the essential content of the plan existed." [Kaiser and Godschalk, 1995, 365(21)]. Edward Bassett in his book the Master Plan in 1938 indicates urban planning is an important aspect of development. According to him there are seven elements relating to land use plans. These are necessary for the living community. Any plan is incomplete without them.

They are: streets, parks, sites for public buildings, public reservations, routes for public utilities, pier-head and bulkhead lines (all public facilities), and zoning districts for private lands. Tools like zoning and taxation proved secondary to these major reservations. Bassett's observation lead the researcher to comprehend the implication of a planning commission, who should act as an advisor on behalf of the community. The commission should be part of the local legislative body and city department.

Without an intermediary body, there would be no link between the community's needs and the government's control over sprawl. It is this observation that one can relate to the current model of land use planning design. The existing land use planning design is based on the influence of innovative ideas channeled from the 1950s to 1980s. At first the government planned the urban structure according to the needs of post war communities. Municipal legislators and managers participated in planning responsibility, hence developed Section 701 of the Housing Act 1954.

Gradually the communities realized the need for a comprehensive purposeful guideline. A local government is to prepare a general plan and there should be a regulatory measure for control. Land use was divided into categories of urban, recreational and forestry. Development expanded as the population expanded. These follow such a set categorization. Urban development received strategic mapping from the local bodies. They provided the funding for larger infrastructure projects like transportation, environment and community college etc. Today planning is in the hand of the American Planning Association.

The planning process has to follow comprehensive policy implication. However, the planning process itself was found to be much influenced by the public and municipal. Whereas these plans follow the planning policy set up by the government they are nevertheless influenced by the financiers, not generally the public itself [Kaiser and Godschalk, 1995]. Effectiveness of plans Kaiser and Godschalk's literature also reveal planning policies are ineffective. The land use patterns mapped in community administrative departments often set out plans without any specific land use or implementation strategy.

Kaiser and Godschalk call these verbal policy plans, designed for non-physical development policy. At the initial stages these plans were found important for foundation policy. However, they give the false impression of concreteness. They were found to be functionary for paper processing purposes. "The Calvert County, MD Comprehensive Plan (Calvert County 1983), winner of a 1985 APA award, exemplifies the verbal policy plan. Its policies are concise, easy to grasp, and grouped in sections corresponding to the six divisions of county government responsible for implementation.

It remains a policy plan, however, because it does not specify a program of specific actions for development management. Though the plan clearly addresses physical development and discusses specific spatial areas, it contains no land use map." [Kaiser and Godschalk, 1995]. Subsidies Urban development requires extensive funding. New areas especially require financial backing for new roads, water, sewer lines, schools and emergency services etc. Whenever a new community develops it subsidize development funding from new businesses and industries.

In Texas for instance officials and citizens debate a proposal of $17 billion on water related issue. The development plan consists of a project near the state's population. The debate is whether the infrastructure will provide the community with better living or not ["Stop Sprawl," 2002]. To connect with the community would mean connecting with the industries. Members fear they will be subsidizing industrial growth instead of urban. If they extend the roads to the communities, they would generate sprawl living on the freeway.

Thus, depending on the kind of subsidies the local community subscribes to, the nature of investment determine sprawl development. A study by Sierra Club's fact sheet reported "In addition to infrastructure investments, cities, states and communities across America spend billions of dollars to attract corporations to their areas. These relocations are often a contributor to sprawl." Since these corporations control the government, contributing to the nation's economy there is little the authority can do to control them.

As Greg LeRoy of the Good Jobs First program at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) showed a study of a suburb in Minneapolis-St. Paul area found 26 out of 29 companies relocated because of the free land subsidies. They were also responsible for 1200 jobs. A shift of this nature obviously shifts the concentration of economic activities away from the city centers ["Stop Sprawl," 2002]. When companies relocate they automatically cut down the cost of building and maintenance.

Transportation and other utilities for companies become the government's priority instead of the people. Hence, the concentration of the cost structure shifts to the suburbs instead to the urban areas. The higher the density of sprawl the higher the cost for infrastructure for the government. In the end the structural cost of maintenance of these suburbs absorb budget allowance for the infrastructure of the urban areas [Gordon and Richardson, 1997]. There are several factors responsible for encouraging subsidies. First of all corporations are the main providers of economic activities.

The sizeable subsidies, the more the community benefit. For instance "One hundred and twenty-three deals approved at a cost of more than $35,000 per job...[and] Thirty-eight deals approved at $100,000 or more per job." [LeRoy and Slocum, 1999]. For this reason they are encouraged to remain in the jurisdiction yet reap the advantage of cheap land use. When corporations have to pay high tax they in turn have to minimize their overhead expenses. Minnesota jurisdictions for instance receive exchange jobs. But these are paid at minimal wage of 20% below the market rate.

Hence, not only corporate subsidies increase sprawl through land use relocation but also through poor wage. Special interests Special interest groups deter from policy application. Developers blame governmental zoning, subdivision ordinances, building codes and permit procedure hinder them from constructing affordable housing. Suburbs on the other hand have few of these mandates. People are willing to commute long distances by car instead of paying high taxes for expensive housing. Property taxes Property taxes is a uniquely designed policy to regulate cost of local infrastructures.

Infrastructures in urban areas depend on property tax for its maintenance and administration. Local bodies govern the rate of these taxes according to the services provided by the government. Property taxes are subjected to local votes for approval. According to Joseph L. Bast property taxes have not proved effective because they are quite flexible according to the needs of the local businesses. "Changes to property tax rates typically require voter approval, making them more flexible than sales or income taxes.

Competition for businesses and new residents from neighboring communities prevents a community from setting its fees or tax rates too high." When the rate of taxes is lowered it lowers the rate of development and hence lesser opportunity for setting urban social services funds for projects relating to new developments. The government mandate "reasonable connection" between the fees of the cost of public facilities and services and compensation for developers. But the reality is that local communities usually outgrow the rate of development.

Any new growth is dependent on external financial sources like businesses and community members themselves [Bast, 1998]. Urban Shift Traditional urbanism indicates that businesses usually locate near the consumers, where the workers live and where the cost of production is less. Skeptics like Peter Gordon [1998] indicate that this old model has become obsolete because the new wave of workers choose to be at a different location. Firms have to follow where the core consumers live.

As the site of urban consumers shift outside city limits, businesses are also forced to follow thus. As Gordon says "they go where the workers want to live. The orientation has flip-flopped. Even manufacturing businesses are no longer locked into specific sites, so they have more locational choices. They want to go where the labor force wants to go.

The workers and their families want to live where the land is cheap and the air is clean and the schools are good and there are high amenities and so forth."[qtd. From Moore, 1998]. The blame cannot solely rest on the authority or the businesses. Consumers are, too, responsible for changing the commuting scenario. As long as they can afford travel expenses, and gain better living quarters, consumers are willing to risk living outside the limits of cities. Gordon [qtd.

From Moore, 1998] estimate "20% of all trips by automobile are for work, 20% are for shopping, and 60% are for things I would call social." Consumers have as much say in determining sprawl expansion as the businesses that lure them away from urban centers. Thus, the "New Urbanism is heavy on intervention, and it's tied into the "civil society," or communitarian, discussion. It dances around defining whether there's a problem with the way we live and says, "There's a problem -- automobile use -- and we have a solution." [Moore, 1998].

Farmland preservation policy The argument that farmland are important for the development of a country have generated thousands of acres of reserved farmland. Farmland preservation policies are assessed and determined by the value of the cropland. The more fertile a region is the more subsidies it gets from the government. Not only does the government "pay" extra to preserve the land but it goes to great length to provide amenities for the land. For instance in Illinois farmland taxes are subsidized.

Assessment value also changes when the Federal government evaluate farmlands. In 1996 farmland in McHenry County was assessed at an average value of $162.22 per acre, using the productivity index. The total equalized assessed valuation for farmland in the county was $43,768,500, while the total value of farms, including improvements was $171,773,069. This was only 3.83% of the total assessed valuation of the county." [Paulson, 1997]. When such land assessment procedure differ from urban assessment then tax amount is restricted to consumers and businesses only.

The law states: "No agency may commit State funds for land acquisition or construction unless it is provided for in an exception contained in that agency's working agreements or until the study of agricultural impacts has been completed by the Department of Agriculture." [Paulson, 1997]. With this mandate, the law has little option to control the spread of farm living by consumers.

Lured by the low rate of taxes and benefiting the same kind of amenities as they would in a city, people are shifting to the outskirt of the cities, hence increasing sprawl. Government influence The federal government do influence the extent of urban sprawl. Specific programs, taxation policies and regulations pertaining to city limits, all influence containment of urban sprawl. Studies conducted indicated that the Federal government can utilize the combination of policies and programs to influence market forces and local land use decisions.

For instance curbing highway expansions can limit people from moving to outskirts of the cities. Furthermore, highways are a major source for infrastructure expenditure. In 1995 a Transportation Research Board reported transportation investments can influence the growth of a location [Government Accounting Office, 1999]. Policies pertaining to water and sewer systems also lead to growth. Investment in these areas does not actually facilitate development. They hoard the budget share of urban development within city limits.

Tax code provisions that subsidize the homeowners through mortgage interest and property tax are also a major contributor purchases outside urban areas [Government Accounting Office, 1999]. Aside from the above, experts also believe that government policies itself greatly contribute to urban sprawl. Take for instance the Clean Air Act which encourages industrial development outside urban areas to conserve quality air standards merely direct industries to the outskirts. Opponents may argue that federal policies do not contribute to urban sprawl as much as other factors.

The fact remains that executive orders do affect the urban sprawl. A combination of growth related issues policies like specific laws as National Environment Policy Act and social growth related policies like Farmland Protection Policy Act all contribute to sprawl albeit a small percentage. Similarly, the government can influence growth plan and/or land use policy to balance the nation's needs. It can influence the law pertaining to environmental policies. It can regulate land use through zoning and controlling local governments.

Yet despite these measures, the government's influence is limited to the state level. Legislation does not cover how and who can purchase land for farming or business purposes; it cannot restrict people from moving to the outskirts and it cannot restrict resources through financial incentives. With the above literature review, the researcher pose the following hypothesis: Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater population, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies.

Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater the amount of agricultural land, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater amount of property tax revenue, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies. RESEARCH DESIGN and METHODS: The researcher uses case / history method for the study. The researcher relies on primary and secondary sources for his study. For the primary source, the researcher relies on journals, books and commentaries from renown peers.

For secondary source, the researcher is relying on non-peer magazines, the Internet, magazines and newspapers for comparing results. Much of the data rely on secondary sources. There are potential bias in these sources which is why the researcher have focused on both proponent and against arguments. The researcher will review non-peer sources first by analyzing the current situation in the country. Through this the researcher will find the gravity of the issue of sprawl.

From there the researcher will review peers' studies, including some of the most renown commentators for urban development like Peter Gordon. The researcher will then present hypothesis, pertaining to the research question: How effective have land use planning policies been on the ability of states to control sprawl? The researcher assigned variables for hypothesis as: Dependent variable [Y]: growth management policies Independent variable [X]: population, agricultural land [acres] and revenue from property taxes.

Unit of analysis: states RESULTS Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater population, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies. Literature review indicate that as soon as urban centers become densely populated, people move to a more open spaced area. Sprawl is the result of gradual shift from urban centers to suburbs. Portland which is an ideal city center that managed to control sprawl show that if government growth programs are managed in an effective manner, then the state will not have sprawl on its outskirts.

The figure in Appendix a show a comparison of sprawl management policies of in Atlanta and Portland. There are however implications for urban concentrated designs. Land use planning is required for regulated distribution of population. The researcher observed the denser the population the more the demand for sprawl living. Where communities do not find enough amenities to suit their living, they often turn towards suburbs for residential purposes. Federal policies are limited to the urban areas.

If there are policies pertaining to the outskirts of the state, then these are often regulated and suited for businesses and farmlands. There are no fix policies for sprawl containment. Should government endeavor to contain population growth outside urban areas, then there should be policies to curtail them by inducing them to remain in the urban areas, providing them suitable living conditions and more facilities.

One example of such revised amenities is the case of comparison between Atlanta and Portland indicate that whereas living style has improved, the accumulation of environment's unhealthy air have increased in Portland. Therefore there is a great need for a balance of environment, taxes, transportation facilities in an urban area before people will stop sprawl completely [LeRoy, 2000]. People find location efficient mortgage provision important. If loan terms are based on home proximity then the cost of living in urban centers is lowered.

Public transportation will also lower because the infrastructure cost less to maintain for a higher population density. Thus, states need more complex growth policies to retain population in the city. Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater the amount of agricultural land, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies. Farmlands contribute to economic prosperity in the country. Agricultural land attract people from various urban areas.

As more and more land are converted to agricultural land form, the state have more opportunity to levy land use policies to regulate the urban areas. A successful example of farmland regulation policy and application is City of DeKalb. From Geneva to City of Dekalb the government have imposed policies pertaining to agricultural farmland by lowering the taxation rate, encouraging farming [Gehl and Paulson, 1997].

Since the state benefit from farmland and buildings "almost $115 million in assessed valuation to the county property tax base (10.4%)" it has become important to balance the implementation of growth policy between urban and agricultural land forms. "In 1992, although farmers made up only 3.5% of the local workforce, they paid $3,217,000 in property taxes and had a net cash return of $24,853,000, making them a major part of the local economy." [See Appendix B].

Furthermore, much of the policies enacted by legislature concentrates on expansion of farmland through subsidies whereas, to curtail sprawl policies must focus on the expansion limitation of farmland to discourage people from becoming "farmers." They need to be attracted to urban amenities like transportation, utilities, working conditions, commuting facilities etc. Farmland policies on the other hand reduce taxes, increase amenities like bulk cheap buys of farmland with full amenities. The introduction of highways also increase farmland because people feel comfortable living there.

Farmers on the other hand can hire people on the pretext to work on farmlands. Larger business corporations also find this kind of arrangement more feasible for their needs to relocate their business. They also prefer to relocate to reduce taxation, increase facilities and reduce overhead costs. Policies must be generated to suit the people's needs so that they are not encouraged to resort to suburbs. Hypothesis In comparing states, the greater amount of property tax revenue, the more likely the state to adopt growth management policies.

In comparing property tax revenue, it has been found that it is indirectly related to the kind of population living in the suburbs. Federal tax prefer to tax owners occupied housing then on the housing consumed through rental. For this reason, there is a tendency for rent oriented housing as compared to ownership. Furthermore, statistics indicate that there is direct effect of tax preference on urban sprawl. The higher the tax, more consumers will be averse from investing in that area.

The federal tax code is often embedded in mortgage rates in the form of interest payments. That is why when people endeavor to buy property they prefer to check out tax rates before buying. Where there is tax defer program implemented, people prefer to buy property in that area [See Appendix B]. Tax defer exchange is another example of containing and slowing down sprawl in North Carolina, where the state allow individuals to take up tax defer exchange for income against housing.

As a result of this individuals prefer to live in urban centers where they can afford to pay for taxes yet be near to the places they work. Businesses also benefit from tax defer exchange thereby cutting down corporate tax. Raising the price of outskirt living means that only a chosen few will be living there. Raising property tax in the suburbs discourage people from going towards farmlands if they are planning to build property for residential or business purposes only.

Statistics however show that the implication of raising property taxes have driven people to other alternatives [see figure above],.