on common ground: winter 2006

WINTER 2004 ON COMMON GROUND 1WINTER 2006 ON COMMON GROUND 1WINTER 2006 ON COMMON GROUND 1WINTER 2006 ON COMMON GROUND 1

WINTER 2006

on the EdgeSmart Growth

New Towns in Rural Areas

Your Town’sTreasures

▼

▼ ConservationSubdivisions

Rural & Exurban Growth

▼

2 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2006

In the past decade, developers and the market have embraceda new and better model of growth that has come to be calledSmart Growth — development that is more compact and walk-

able; provides greater variety of housing types, community designsand transportation options for consumers; makes more efficientuse of land resources; and results in less paving of the countryside.Successful Smart Growth is evident in the strong market for newhousing in older, central areas of cities; in creation of new down-towns in older suburbs; in transit-oriented development at rail sta-tions; and in higher-density housing development, such as condo-miniums. Smart Growth practitioners have popularized new plan-ning tools, including visioning exercises and charrettes (intensemulti-day community planning workshops), computer visualiza-tion of new development, and replacing old zoning and measure-ment codes with form-based codes concerned with the structureand character of buildings and neighborhoods.

Thus far, these Smart Growth successes have been primarilyfocused on close-in urban and suburban locations. Smart Growth

Smart GrowthIn the Field with

WINTER 2006 ON COMMON GROUND 3

concepts have been most enthusiasticallyembraced by older cities, towns and neighbor-hoods that need redevelopment and first-ring sub-urbs that find increasing land values are drivinghigher density and a wider variety of land uses.This smart development represents a small per-centage of actual development. Nationally, theprimary development trend is conversion of ruralland at the far fringe of metropoli-tan areas into low-density develop-ment and growth near small citiesin non-metropolitan areas. Overall,the density of development nation-wide is decreasing. Early indica-tions are that three-dollar-per-gal-lon gasoline appears to have littleeffect on this trend.

In this issue of On CommonGround, we focus on the placeswhere most new growth in Americais occurring — the far suburbs, theexurban areas beyond the edge ofmajor metropolitan areas, and thesmaller non-metropolitan cities.What role can Smart Growthapproaches play in these regions tomaintain the scenic beauty, thesense of openness, and the relaxedenvironment attractive to the pub-lic? How can land be preserved toprevent poorly planned communities and unap-pealing landscapes that many people are fleeing?How can new communities be designed so theyhave a character that is valued now and in thefuture? What design techniques, regulatory mech-anisms and market responses can create

smarter growth inthese far-flung areas?Ultimately, how canthe infrastructure andpublic service needsof the new populationbe met without ruin-ing the integrity of the landscape that

attracted them in the first place?Our reporters have covered the countryside to

give you a detailed look at the current state ofexurban and rural development and how SmartGrowth approaches can improve our increasinglydispersed communities.

For more information on NAR and Smart Growth, go to www.realtor.org/smartgrowth.

On Common Ground is published twice a year by the Government Affairs office of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (NAR), and is distributed free of charge. The publication presents a widerange of views on Smart Growth issues, with the goal of encouraging a dialogue among REALTORS®, electedofficials and other interested citizens. The opinions expressed in On Common Ground are those of the authorsand do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policy of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, itsmembers or affiliate organizations.

Editor: Joseph R. Molinaro, Manager, Smart Growth ProgramsNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®

500 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001

Distribution: For more copies of this issue or to be placed on our mailing list for future issues of On Common Ground, please contact Ted Wright, NAR Government Affairs, at (202) 383-1206 or [email protected].


Micropolitans

28Future Transit Needs

Solving Sprawl

54

6 Keepingit Rural

22

Winter 20066 Keeping it Rural

by David Goldberg

12 Conservation SubdivisionsGood for the land, good for the pocketbook.by Steve Wright

18 Editors ChoiceNature Friendly Communities:Habitat Protection and Land Use Planning.

22 Micropolitans: The Bestof Both Worldsby Heidi Johnson-Wright

28 We are Ready!Developing neighborhoods apply Smart Growth principles to prepare for future transit needs.by Christine Jordan Sexton

32 The Future of Farms in Americaby Brad Broberg

38 Ready, Set...GrowthRural counties prepare for development. by Jason Miller

44 Hidden Treasures in Your TownMaintaining you small town’s economic viability with smart planning.by John Van Gieson

50 New Towns in Rural AreasSaving rural space with Smart Growth.by Brad Broberg

54 Solving the Problem of Sprawl10 Principles for Smart Growth on the suburban fringe.

58 Steering GrowthState Government Attempts.by Doug Porter

64 Smart Growth in the States

Future of Farms

32

On Common Ground

On Common Ground thanks the following contributors and organizations for photographs, illustrations and artist renderings reprintedin this issue: Kurt Andrae, LandChoices Advisory Group; Kent Bain; Doug Barnes, Kennecott Land; Penny L, Becker, Sheridan WYTravel and Tourism; Donald R. Belk, Town of Cary, North Carolina; Martha Cato, Valley, Alabama; Corinth Convention and VisitorsBureau; Dick Garvey; Rose Grayson, Chicago Associates Planning and Architects; Jessica M. Icenjour, Greater Mount Airy Chamber ofCommerce; Kellogg Foundation; Jana Kettering, Kennecott Land Company; Kate Kimball, 1000 Friends of Oregon; Lisa Kohner, ScottCounty Public Affairs; Lee Langstaff, Montgomery County, Maryland Ag. Reserve; Julie LeBlanc, 4 Towns Citizens Action Team, Inc;Heather Mackin, KB Home; Lisa MacKinnon, 1000 Friends of Wisconsin; Kirt Manecke, LandChoices; Lisa Maull, Whittaker Homes;Jason Miller; Tracy Paden; Ed Rosenberger, Kennecott Land; Christy Sabdo; Allison E. Schlegelmilch (Metzger), The LancasterChamber of Commerce & Industry; Joanna Schumann, Wisconsin Department of Administration; Evan Scurti, Ashland EconomicDevelopment; Doug Self, City of Driggs, Idaho; Jack Shouba; Three Rivers Park District; Brian Williams; Margie Wilson, Skagitoniansto Preserve Farmland; John Zawitosky, Montgomery County, MD

HiddenTreasures

44



By David Goldberg

Keeping Smart Growth’s Biggest Challenge?

it Rural


Since returning from Vietnam in 1972, Jim McConnell has worked with his twobrothers doing what three generations did before them: farming the region westof Cleveland, Ohio that McConnell counts as some of the most productive agri-

cultural land on the planet. But as Cleveland and other Ohio cities “empty out”, hesays, rural Ohio is being carved into house lots large and small. Where once there wasa clear division between town and country, subdivisions and mini-estates are bleedinginto the countryside. Farmers like McConnell,whose Hickory Grove Farm raises corn, soybeans,wheat and dairy heifers on both their own andleased land, wonder how long they can keep at it.

“Cleveland has sprawled out to where it haspretty much obliterated the farmland in MedinaCounty,” McConnell laments, “and now wealready see it starting to happen in our county,”Lorain County, west of Cleveland.

“You can easily get to the point where it’s justnot worth it from the farmer’s standpoint to put upwith all the issues that come with working aroundhomes and development,” he adds. “There arecertain times of the year when we have to worklate at night, making a lot of noise and kicking upa lot of dust, and someone who moves out from thecity might not understand that. The smells thatcome off livestock operations, people from the country just take it as part of living outhere, but the new people don’t necessarily see it that way. You have more traffic anddifficulty moving large farm equipment. You have a field you’ve been leasing a longtime, and then the owner sells off the frontage and you have inaccessible land, or fiveproperty owners to deal with. At some point, these problems become almost unten-able.”

Ohio, of course, is not the only area of the country grappling with the rapid disap-pearance of unbroken tracts of farm, forest and range lands. The nation’s recent longrun of low fuel costs and high in-town real estate prices, coupled with a mushroomingsecond-home market, have combined to propel housing development deeper into ter-ritory once regarded as anything but urban. As a result, more and more communitiesare experimenting with various techniques for preserving agricultural and naturalareas.

To date, their success has been spotty, given the sheer force of the trend, says DaveTheobald, research scientist with the Natural Resource Ecology Lab at Colorado StateUniversity, who studies what he calls rural sprawl. “What always struck me is that peo-ple were talking about urban sprawl all the time, but they were ignoring rural sprawl,”he says. Theobald defines rural sprawl simply as “very low-density growth beyond theurban areas.” House lots in these exurban areas range from two to 20 acres per house,by and large. As one measure of the impact, he notes that five million residents ofCensus-identified rural areas spend an hour or more commuting to work. Nationwide,in 2000, there were roughly 78,000 square miles in urban and suburban residentialhousing density, Theobalds has calculated. “There were seven times that at exurbandensities of one house per two to 40 acres,” he says. “By 2020, the higher-density urbanand suburban land area is forecasted to expand by 2.2 percent. But exurban land areawill grow at more than six times that rate!”

State and local governments are increasingly concerned, because rural sprawl notonly takes productive farmland out of commission, but it also can disrupt wildlife habi-tat, watershed protection and forestry. Worse, from government officials’ viewpoint, far-flung development costs far more in services than it can support, says Sandra McKew,a land-use economist who helps Midwestern towns calculate the costs of services for


new development. “These rural places have to spendhundreds of millions of dollars to improve roads,schools, water and sewer capacity, to extend policeand fire coverage, but there’s a total anti-tax attitude.So what do they do? Go after more development, particularly commercial that will bring in more tax revenue.”

Though this is not a new phenomenon, the paceand ubiquity of change has reached such a pitch thatefforts to combat rural sprawl are probably receivingmore attention than ever before. This comes at thesame time that a reactivated “property rights” move-ment is working to counter some of the land protec-tions put in place in the first wave of such moves 30-plus years ago in states such as Oregon andMaryland. As a result, states and localities are beingchallenged to come up with new approaches andtechniques that are both fair and effective.

Traditionally, there have been a handful of toolsavailable to protect open space and guide develop-ment in rural areas. After a quick overview, we’llexplore some examples to learn what is working, andwhat isn’t. The first option, of course, is outright pur-chase of open space, either by government or non-profit entity. Though increasingly popular with voters,the shortcomings are immediately apparent: Becausefunds are limited, they can only hope to secure themost vulnerable sites. The most common tool is large-lot zoning, in which local governments set large min-imum lot sizes of five, 10, 20 or more acres. Public ornonprofit entities also can purchase developmentrights. This involves paying a farmer or otherlandowner for any rights he might have to develop hisland, with the proviso that the owner keeps the land

more or less in its current state. A related concept isthe transfer of development rights. Here, a developerbuys the development rights from an area designatedfor agricultural or open space and applies those rightsto an area targeted for development, in exchange forbeing allowed to build at higher densities. Localitiesalso can allow for conservation subdivisions, in whichhouses are clustered together in a small footprint,rather than scattered among large lots of equal size,so as to leave a high percentage of the tract undevel-oped. Lastly, there are a variety of ways to constructmulti-jurisdictional plans in which adjoining towns,counties or other jurisdictions agree to limit develop-ment in some areas while steering growth to designated zones; this often involves some sort of tax-base sharing.

Maryland experiments with big lots, buying development rights

Over the last few decades, localities in Maryland,as well as the state itself, have been among the pio-neers in many of these approaches. ParrisGlendening, who was Maryland’s governor from1995 to 2003, has studied them all, having made ruralpreservation a centerpiece of his administration.“Preservation of the agricultural economy and therevitalization of existing communities are twoanswers to the same equation,” Glendening says.“When farms are flourishing, they are less likely to bedeveloped. And unless you can stop the bleeding intothe countryside, existing cities and towns will sufferand decline.”

The early experiments with stopping rural sprawloften seemed aimed primarily at preserving a pictur-

Preservation of the agricultural economy and therevitalization of existing communities are two

answers to the same equation.


esque landscape rather than sus-taining agriculture and wildlife, hesaid. “Counties in southernMaryland relied on large-lot zon-ing for a long time, and for a whileit seemed to work. I’m personallynot an advocate of large-lot zoning,though. The challenge is you oftenend up with low-density sprawl. St.Mary’s County, for example, start-ed with minimum five-acre lots,and ended up with subdivisions onseptic tanks. You can raise the min-imum, but with 10 or 15 homes on100 acres you still use far moreagricultural land, and the costs forservices are high.” Glendeningalso echoed McConnell’s concernsabout the detrimental effects forfarmers of the encroachment of for-mer city folk.

Large-lot zoning also reliesentirely on maintaining a regula-tion in perpetuity. But the first lawof regulations, or course, is that

they change. Inevitably, landowners exert pressureto allow more development as the growth marchestoward them, figuring they deserve to make thesame sort of killing that a farmer down the roadmade by selling his land. As we’ll see in the Oregonexample below, the pressure can be extremelyintense. “I have a lot of sympathy for farmers whosee this as their retirement or children’s college, whodon’t know that they can pass on to another genera-tion for farming, and that’s why I think a system thatpays landowners for development rights makes greatsense,” Glendening said.

Maryland has relied extensively on purchase ofdevelopment rights, or PDR, in efforts to preserve therapidly developing Eastern Shore. A long-time get-away destination and haven for second homes, themostly rural Eastern Shore now is growing homes forcommuters to Washington, D.C. and Baltimore,despite treks of up to two hours each way. Usingstate funds from the Rural Legacy program createdunder Glendening, along with other public and pri-vate sources, about a quarter of 1.2 million acres of

the Eastern Shore has been taken off the develop-ment table through PDR, with an ambitious goal toreach 50 percent by 2010. The plan is working,Glendening and others say, because effective preser-vation groups are coordinating with motivated localgovernments; the conserved land is located in desig-nated agricultural and environmental preservationcorridors, rather than in scattered locations; andbecause regional planning efforts are directinggrowth to designated areas. “In five or six years peo-ple will look back and see that an enormous amountof land has been preserved,” Glendening said. Butevery success brings new challenges. “Now devel-opers are using the existence of preserved land as aselling point, and that is drawing development to thefringes of what you are trying to preserve, and thatwas not the intention at all. That comes down to local officials enforcing their plans and holding faston their zoning.”

In five or six years people will look back

and see that an enormousamount of land has

been preserved.

Fulton County, Georgia


Protecting agriculture through joint planning in OhioCreating an enforceable plan that succeeds in

curbing rural sprawl almost always involves coopera-tion among multiple jurisdictions. Recognizing thisfact, Jim McConnell and others in their Ohio town-ship of Pittsfield have created a joint economic devel-opment agreement with the neighboring city ofOberlin. (Ohio counties are divided into townships,rural jurisdictions lacking the capacity to providewater, sewer and other urban services that cities pro-vide.) Cities and townships often fight one another fordevelopment or over annexations, but Oberlin andPittsfield have agreed to support one another in a planthat designates about 20 percent of the township’sarea, just outside Oberlin, as appropriate for develop-ment. The township has agreed not to oppose annex-ations in the development zone and to discouragedevelopment in its large farm zones in return for ashare of the city’s tax receipts. Under the 50-yearagreement, the township will receive an 18-percentshare on all withholding from commercial payrollsand 2.35 mills of property tax on commercial andindustrial areas. At the same time, the townshipengaged citizens in writing a land-use plan that willguide land use throughout the township in Smart-Growth fashion.

“Unlike a lot of other parts of rural Ohio, I thinkagriculture will continue to be viable into the futurehere,” McConnell says. “The primary thing we’re try-ing to guard against is rural sprawl. We hope that wewill slow it down, and when something is built it willbe done so it works better and looks better than if we’ddone no planning at all. What would happen if we’rehit by a wave of hot development? I wouldn’t betagainst the development. You can’t stop it, but maybeyou can shape it and direct it.”

Transferring development rights on a grand scalein Georgia

The transfer of development rights, in which devel-opers essentially buy density from one place andbuild it in another, is brilliant in the abstract, but verydifficult to implement. One key reason is that while

“sending” areas might be eager to receive money fordoing nothing to their land, it is harder to find enthu-siastic neighborhoods willing to receive greater den-sity. The best hope might be to allow for the transfer statewide, Glendening suggests, with pur-chased development rights eligible for use in any cityor town.

Another approach is the unique one being takenby the nonprofit Chattahoochee Hill CountryAlliance, in rural Georgia, 35 miles south of Atlanta.There, one large land holder — Steve Nygren, afounder of the Peasant Restaurant chain — has pulledtogether the owners of 65,000 acres to master plantheir development. The area in south Fulton County isunusual, in that it remains largely undeveloped evenas counties on all sides of have fallen into Atlanta’sever-waxing orbit. One reason south Fulton wasskipped is that the northern half of the county, whichcontains much of the city of Atlanta and its toniestsuburbs, has higher taxes and stricter developmentregulations than its later-developing neighbors.

Realizing that south Fulton’s development wasinevitable, given its relative proximity to Atlanta, andthat many landowners would look to prosper, Nygrenand other key property holders developed a grandplan that would accommodate 100,000 new residentswhile conserving half or more of the district’s rollingpastures, horse farms, creeks and granite outcrop-pings. It would do this by concentrating developmentprimarily in three compact, walkable villages, tiedtogether by a greenway and trail system. The scheme,

One large land holder has pulledtogether the ownersof 65,000 acres to master plan theirdevelopment.

which in 2002 was adopted into the county’s com-prehensive land-use plan and is regulated by anoverlay zone, depends largely on transfer of devel-opment rights. Anyone hoping to build homes orcommercial buildings in the villages would need tobuy density from designated conservation zones; atthe moment most of the area is zoned at one houseper acre under Fulton’s “agricultural/residential”zoning. Selling landowners are expected to fetch 40to 60 percent of market value, while retaining theright to live on, farm, sell or otherwise use the land,provided they don’t develop it.

“The plan gives most of us at least something ofwhat we want,” says Nygren. “Those who boughtproperty hoping to develop it still can make a return,while those of us who bought or inherited the landhoping it would stay the way it was get an area thatis substantially preserved over what we would getwith conventional sprawl.” Nygren himself is developing on a small part of his holdings, a 70-acrehamlet dubbed Serenbe that will have 224 houses,townhomes and live-work units within walking distance of a few neighborhood shops, surroundedby 157 acres set aside for an organic farm, livestock grazing and forests. Some homes alreadyare complete and a bake shop opened in earlySeptember. (For more information, please seehttp://www.chatthillcountry.org/)

Oregon looks to put it all togetherNo state has protected more of its rural heritage

than Oregon. Nearly all of the rural landscape, 25million acres, is covered by zoning that excludes alluses but farming or forestry, meaning it is off-limitsfor development of almost any kind. In Oregon,every incorporated town or city is required to estab-lish an urban-growth boundary in coordination withthe surrounding county that includes the existingurban area and enough vacant land for 20 yearsgrowth. Outside the boundary, all open land suitablefor agricultural use is required to be zoned for farmor forest use only, and dwellings are restricted to useby farmers and agricultural and forestry operations.

The system, created in the early 1970s, hasworked to help sustain an economically successfulfarm industry in Oregon, known for its Hood Riverpears, Columbia basin cherries, Yamhill Valleywines, grass seed and nursery stock. Farm gatereceipts have quadrupled over the last threedecades.

Despite that success, the system is threatened bystatewide ballot measure 37, passed last November,which says in essence that those landowners whosaw development prohibited on their property whenthe planning laws were passed are entitled either tocompensation or development rights. Now,Oregonians must decide first, whether they want to

preserve the rural landscape, and second, whetherto create a system of transferable development cred-its or other compensatory program, says Bob Stacey,executive director of 1000 Friends of Oregon, a non-profit that advocates for the goals of the land protec-tion program.

“For 30 years Oregonians thought we had theanswer to rural sprawl,” Stacey says. “We probablywill have to do what others have done and make useof conservation easements and transferable develop-ment rights. The one thing that we do have thatother states don’t is a planning and zoning systemthat reinforces such a program.”

ConclusionAs the stories above make clear, the effort to pre-

serve a viable rural landscape in the face of develop-ment requires abundant creativity, motivation andsavvy. States and localities are grappling with theseissues today as never before, with the result thatmany are struggling toward creative solutions thatmight — just might — work to ensure that our chil-dren and grandchildren know what working andunspoiled landscapes look like.

David A. Goldberg is the communications director forSmart Growth America, a nationwide coalition based in Washington, D.C. that advocates for land-use policyreform. In 2002, Mr. Goldberg was awarded a LoebFellowship at Harvard University where he studied urban policy.


The effort to preserve aviable rural landscape in the face of developmentrequires abundant creativity,motivation and savvy.


Kathy Dennis loves walking, evenin the depth of the harsh GreatLakes winter, from her house to

her detached garage.She loves her subdivision’s natural

trails, its close-knit diverse community,its bird walks, its acres of preserveddunes, meadows, woods, pastures andponds.

Dennis grew up a city girl inMilwaukee. Her husband, Karl, grewup on Chicago’s very urban South Sideand the couple loved vertical city livingin a Chicago condominium on LakeMichigan. The odds that the recentlyretired couple would leave the intensityof the city for a rural development 60miles from the Windy City would seemlong.

But the Dennises live in TryonFarms, a master-planned ConservationSubdivision that has committed to pre-serving 120 of its 150 acres as pristine,ecologically diverse rural land.Conservation Subdivisions seek to pre-serve farmland and open space —instead of leveling, sectioning off, com-pletely bisecting with roads and other-wise converting hills, wetlands, woodsand other natural areas into a built-outconventional subdivision.

“It’s the little things; you really knowyour neighbors,” Kathy Dennis said ofTryon, located very near LakeMichigan in Michigan City, Indiana.“We have nearly 60 households and weknow everyone’s name. So many peo-ple in condos or conventional subdivi-sions come home, shut the door andnever go out except for work and shop-ping. Here, you meet your neighbors,you have social gatherings, you use thehiking trails together.”

The Dennis family first bought a lit-tle 600-square-foot cabin in Tryon as aweekend getaway. After a few years offalling in love with the conserved landand the fabulous architecture thatblends contemporary design with struc-tures that are in complete harmonywith the natural surroundings, theypurchased a 2,000-square-foot perma-nent home.

“My husband was a very urban per-son, thought he’d never live in thecountry. He came out here because ofme and fell in love with it,’’ KathyDennis said. “We traveled internation-ally, we could have picked any spot wewanted to in the world, but we retiredand settled here because this felt likehome.”

Tryon Farms is the brainchild ofanother Chicago couple, Eve Noonanand her husband Ed of ChicagoAssociates Planners & Architects. Theyhad long-enjoyed a second home on thebeach in Michigan City.

When they decided to purchase thenearby Tryon Family farmstead, a pic-turesque piece of Indiana dairy farm-land held by the same family from backto the Civil War, the Noonans focusedon preserving more than 70 percent ofthe land.

They knew the site, with its restoredprairie and 150-year-old beech trees,would be attractive as a second home toChicagoland city dwellers. But with theSouth Shore passenger rail — one ofthe nation’s oldest interurban lines —just five minutes away, they knew their rural residential devel-opment would still feature transit con-nectivity to the big city.

SUBDIVISIONSCONSERVATION


GOOD FOR THE POCKETBOOKGOOD FOR THE LAND,

By Steve Wright

“If we hadn’t developed this way, the propertywould have been all commercial — totally flat-tened. With a Conservation Subdivision, we wereable to preserve a 40-foot dune. Our dream was tobuild something like this.”

Homes in Tryon, clustered in little pockets ofland, range in price from the high $100,000s to themid $400,000s. The 120-acre preserve is held by a

nonprofit foundation that uses the old barn and res-idential farm animals to present educational work-shops. The nonprofit guarantees the 120 acres willnever be developed and it saves homeowners frompaying taxes on what would have been valued as a120-acre common area.

“We build in stages, starting in front of the par-cel and working our way back, organically con-trolled by the land. This means we don’t have bigup-front prices and don’t have to sell houses quick,

quick, quick in order to get out fromunder the financing,” Eve Noonan saidof the advantages of ConservationSubdivisions to developers’ bottom lines.“We’ve also discovered our square-footprice, because we build so incrediblywell, sells much higher per square footthan conventional or traditional build-ing.”

Noonan said the biggest hurdle for awould-be Conservation Subdivisiondeveloper is an outdated, conventionalset of city or county regulations that stip-ulate minimum lot sizes, minimum roadwidths and utility requirements thatcould prevent the goal of preservingland while clustering houses.

“By doing these clustered settle-ments, we don’t have to do the infra-structure for the whole 170 acres, whichsaves money,’’ Eve Noonan said. We hadto get special permission to build ourroads more narrow than code allowed.With narrow roads, drivers slow down,kids feel safe riding bikes and the firetrucks can always turn around using partof the farmland off the paved surface. Wealso had to fight the city to be allowed todo Constructed Wastewater Wetlandssewage treatment on site, instead of run-ning miles of city sanitary lines.”

Suburban Detroit resident KirtManacke is so convinced thatConservation Subdivisions are the anti-dote to America’s unwavering consump-tion of rural land for suburban sprawl,that he created LandChoices. The non-profit organization strives to inform

stakeholders about land protection options “thatare sensible and beneficial for both land developersand landowners.”

Manacke asserts that in addition to protectingrural lands for crop production, livestock grazing or just beautiful green space, ConservationSubdivisions have a track record of success forlandowners, developers, townships and homebuyers.


Our square-foot price,because we build soincredibly well, sellsmuch higher per squarefoot than conventional or traditional building.

The Dennis family at Tryon Farms

”Contrary to popular belief, conservationistsand developers make a very profitable team,reducing costs while increasing the desirabilityand market value of new developments. Fewlandowners, citizens and planning commissionersrealize such options exist,” said Manacke, echo-ing the words of his press release about his on-lineclearing house of conservation information.

Randall Arendt, a member of LandChoices’Advisory Group, is one of the nation's foremostauthorities on Conservation Subdivision design —one might even call him the father of the move-ment to bring development to a plot of land whileperpetually preserving at least half of itsrural/agricultural nature.

“One developer in Texas who hired me toredesign his 60-acre subdivision told me that hissite grading costs plummeted from $300,000 to$50,000 as a result of my re-design, “ Arendt saidvia e-mail interview while overseas. “InTennessee, my re-design saved one developerapproximately $212,000 in street constructioncosts, while at the same time introducing signifi-cantly more quality open space into the layout.Another design is credited by an Indiana develop-er as having added $20,000 to $25,000 of value toeach of his 40 lots.”

Arendt, a landscape planner, site designer andauthor of more than 20 smart land use publications,has worked for clients in 21 states — from Florida toTexas to the South and the Midwest, whereConservation Design has become a very popularway of accommodating housing growth while con-serving rolling farm land and crucial wetlands.

In North Carolina’s prized and growingRaleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill research trianglearea, the town of Cary has earned awards for itscontrolled growth including ConservationSubdivisions.

“We adopted an ordinance that requires thatConservation Subdivisions be done in the area thattouches our watershed,” said town of Cary SeniorPlanner Don Belk. “This involves about 1,500 acresin our western planning jurisdiction where there arevery poor soils in a very rural area, but municipalutilities are now available so it also is the hottestdevelopment area in the region.”

Previously, the 1,500 acres were zoned for min-imum one-acre lots. Now, the area is allowed tohave up to 2.5 units per acre, but only if housingis clustered and a significant amount of preservedopen space is created as part of the development.

“We have a representative of Toll Brothers —one of the biggest homebuilding companies in thenation — who is actually going to the landownersand encouraging them to dedicate the conserva-tion land up front, before they sell,” Belk said.“They take advantage of the state’s conservationtax credit program for a big tax break, then theyget the proceeds from the sale of the remainingdevelopable land.”

Many successful developers are converts toConservation Subdivisions. Waukesha,Wisconsin-based Siepmann Realty Corporation

Conservationists and developers make a very profitable team, reducing costs while increasing the desirability and market valueof new developments.



has been creating communities that conserve landfor more than 40 of its 62 years in business.

When a visitor clicks on Siepmann’s internethomepage, a spinning counter comes to rest on thefigure 1,566 — the number of acres of open space preserved in the developer’s conservationcommunities.

Sugar Creek Preserve, in southeasternWisconsin, is a Conservation Subdivision of 52

homesites situated on 260 pristine acres inWalworth County’s Sugar Creek Valley. Its creatorsare development consultant Siepmann Realty,landowner Keefe Real Estate, developer Red WingLand Company and land planner GreenerProspects — Arendt’s company.

More than 170 acres are permanently preservedopen space marked by restored prairie, hardwoodforests, a stream, a lake and 4.5 miles of walkingtrails. Lot sizes are large, starting at just more thanone acre selling for $110,000 and ranging up tofour acres, priced at $300,000.

“REALTORS® selling Conservation Subdivisionhomesites must sell the community and environ-ment first, the specific lot second. It is important to

frame the lot purchase differently than a regular lotand block subdivision. At Sugar Creek Preserve wetell buyers that they aren’t buying one acre lots,they are buying a 176 acre lot, of which they haveone acre to build on,” said Rob Keefe of LakeGeneva, Wisconsin-based Keefe Real Estate.

However, Conservation Subdivisions do posechallenges. They don’t work everywhere. Denseurban areas or regions boxed in by oceans, moun-

tains or other extreme boundaries — such asFlorida’s Everglades — simply do not have the largetracts of land required. And, while ConservationSubdivisions offer prices in the mid-range, rarely arethey good sites for affordable housing because theyare located far from urban job centers and theiramenities. Their relatively low densities compared tothe central city densities make it difficult to offer low-cost housing that requires many units on landacquired as cheaply as possible.

Keefe said there are even challenges to luringpeople that are already in the market for develop-ments that conserve large tracts of land.“Conservation Subdivisions can be difficult to sellin the early stages. Prairie restorations look terriblefor the first two years while the grasses are beingestablished,” he said. “The construction traffic andexcavation work takes away from the peaceful nat-ural setting. Like any new subdivision it’s hard to

Homeowners will benefit by buying a site surrounded by preserved land.

Sugar Creek Preserve, Wisconsin


SOME BENEFITS OF CONSERVATION DESIGN (adapted from the writings of Randall Arendt)

1. Greater flexibility in lot sizes allows developers tocreate more compact lots. Conservation Design canbe used on lots that are serviced by municipalwater/sewer, where lots are typically reduced from20,000 square feet 12,000 square feet. Compactlots are a benefit to empty-nesters who wish tominimize their routine outdoor maintenance work(mowing lawns, raking leaves, etc.). It also enablesdevelopers to take far greater advantage of specialplaces on the property (such as knolls offeringviews of ponds, meadows, etc.) by siting a largernumber of narrower lots there than would ordinarilybe possible.

2. The ability to divide and sell parts of the protectedopen space as "conservancy lots" enables develop-ers to tap into the higher-end country-property mar-ket, boosting profit margin and also adding value toall lots in their vicinity.

3. Reduced site grading costs are another "hiddenincentive." This enables large tree preservation,which retains the value that such trees add to theneighborhood.

4. Reduced street costs are sometimes another bene-fit, via wider street layouts permitting shorterstreets.

5. Greater attractiveness, provided by the open space,is another benefit having direct economic value.Conservation lots sell for a higher price comparedto house lots without open space, such as those inconventional subdivisions.

6. Faster absorption rates are another economicadvantage created when significant amounts ofopen space are preserved. Conservation lots sellout faster when placed on the market.

CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS INTERNET RESOURCES

Tryon Farm: www.tryonfarm.comLandChoices: www.landchoices.comRandall Arendt: www.greenerprospects.comTown of Cary: www.townofcary.orgSiepmann Realty: www.siepmannrealty.comSugar Creek Preserve: www.sugarcreekpreserve.com Keefe Real Estate: www.keeferealestate.comRed Wing Land Company: www.redwingland.com

visualize how the homes will relate to each other before construc-tion begins. REALTORS® have to be very good at painting a pic-ture of the completed project and selling the lifestyle vision to theprospective buyers.”

Financial incentives are always a plus. Tryon developer EveNoonan said resales are strong in her Michigan City, IndianaConservation Subdivision; homeowners will benefit by buying asite surrounded by preserved land. Not only will homeowners ben-efit in the long run, but developers benefit by saving site gradingand infrastructure costs. “I think in lots of ways, we have found outfinancially that this kind of development can be very, very success-ful,” she said. “That is good news not just for everybody’s pocket-books but also good news for Mother Nature.”

Wright frequently writes about Smart Growth and sustainable communities.He and his wife live in a restored historic home in the heart of Miami’s LittleHavana. Contact him at: [email protected].

Architectural renderings depict the town of Cary, North Carolina filling in with development while preserving open space.


Among real estate professionals, it’s no secretthat the scenic beauty and natural featuresof an area make for desirable neighbor-

hoods and enduring home values.A new book, Nature-Friendly Communities:

Habitat Protection and Land Use Planning byChristopher Duerksen and Cara

Snyder, examines these connections more deeply,linking environmental initiatives to heightenedproperty values and long-term economic growth.

Published by Island Press, a nonprofit publish-ing house with strong conservation credentials,

Duerksen and Snyder ’sbook focuses as much onsolid econometric modelingand fiscal analyses as itdoes on “feel good’’ envi-ronmental projects.

The result? A thorough-ly-researched and well-written narrative that fea-tures compelling data,helpful examples andcarefully compiled casestudies on communitiesthat have made environ-mental protection andeconomic development asingle goal.

Duerksen andSnyder offer an impor-tant contribution to thegrowing body ofresearch about howpeople perceive theirquality of life. And,they offer new insightinto why intangiblessuch as “recreationalopportunities’’ figureas much into highquality-of-life ratingsas more definablepublic benefits suchas police and fireprotection.

Moreover, byfocusing on achiev-able goals at thelocal level, theauthors create asense of urgencythat underscores

editor’s choiceBook: Nature-Friendly Communities: Habitat Protection

and Land Use PlanningAuthors: By Christopher Duerksen and Cara Snyder

Publisher: Island Press


the need for individ-ual action. While asingle rain garden orshoreline buffer proj-ect won’t eliminaterun-off problems for awatershed that spansmultiple governmen-tal jurisdictions,small-scale successesmay encourage moreambitious projects.

Real estate profes-sionals, developersand land-use plan-ners would do well totake heed of one ofthe book’s centralthemes. Even as itbuilds on evidencethat protecting theenvironment can savegovernments moneyand increase privateproperty values, thebook points out astark new reality.Unlike the last centu-ry, when over-fishing,over-hunting andunbridled exploita-tion of timber andmineral resourceswere the primaryforces in decliningenvironmental quali-ty, today there is a new culprit.

According to Duerksen and Snyder, this under-lying culprit is the destruction and degradation ofhabitat, often connected to “the conversion of vaststretches of land to housing, commercial develop-ment and transportation projects.” Currently, 36states suffer from extreme or high levels of dam-age to native ecosystems with prairies, oak savan-nas and sagebrush steppe areas in dramaticdecline. Meanwhile, the book reports, surveys bythe National Audubon Society document signifi-cant population reductions for almost 30 percentof North American bird species.

Yet, the book praises recent trends that offerhope for the future, including: public-private part-nerships to fund land acquisitions and the pur-chase of development rights; growing awarenessof the need for tighter zoning and subdivisioncontrols with some novel approaches such as ruralclustering; increased use of incentives for infill

development andgreen space protection; and efforts to integrateaffordable housing strategies as part of broaderplanning efforts.

A major portion of the book centers on com-pelling case studies that provide helpful examplesof community-based strategies to achieve growthwhile protecting the very elements that ensure ahigh quality of life. The examples cited involvehighly successful public-sector initiatives andfocus on government efforts across the nation.These projects cover regional initiatives, and thebook appropriately points to the need for workableregulatory and administrative frameworks to stim-ulate activity.

The emphasis on these public-private initia-tives provides an opportunity to explore a commu-nity’s responsibility to make recreational opportu-nities and access to natural areas available to allsegments of the population. Early on, Duerksenand Snyder’s research indicates that lower-

SHOWCASE COMMUNITIES

Among the communities highlighted in thebook Nature-Friendly Communities are:

Austin, TexasBaltimore County, Md. Bath Township, Ohio Charlotte Harbor, Fla. Chicago Wilderness Dane County, Wis.DeKalb County, Geo. Eugene, Ore. Farmington Valley, Conn. Fort Collins, Colo. King County, Wash. Larimer County, Colo.Loudoun County, Va.Pima County, Ariz. Pittsford, N.Y. Placer County, Calif. Powell County, Mont. Sanibel, Fla. Teton County, Wyo. Traverse Bay Area, Mich. Twin Cities Region, Minn.

The initiatives providean opportunity to

explore a community’sresponsibility to

make recreationalopportunities andaccess to natural areas available.


income residents are heavy usersof local parks; U.S. citizens withhousehold incomes of less than$20,000 derive significant bene-fits in terms of physical exercise,family well-being and stressreduction thanks to these “free’’recreational opportunities.

While the 20 communitieshighlighted in the book all have

tailored their strategies to address local circum-stances, several have undertaken projects aimed atspecific problems such as improving water quality.

Examples include:• Austin, Texas, is cited as “a model nature-

friendly community’’ because of an impres-sive set of government and non-governmentalprograms designed to protect naturalresources, open space and wildlife habitat.Over the years, the community has workedsteadily to purchase tens of thousands of acresto protect sensitive aquifer recharge areas. Inaddition, the community has created aWatershed Protection and DevelopmentReview Department to monitor and protectlocal watersheds while also providing compre-hensive development review services.

• Bath Township, Ohio, is noted for an exten-sive update of its zoning code that features aRiparian Overlay District designed to protectrivers, streams and other waterways through-out the region. Most of the town obtains drink-ing water from wells that are recharged withsurface water from the watershed. The areaalso is home to the clean headwaters of riversand streams that are critical to the rejuvena-tion of Lake Erie. The Riparian OverlayDistrict imposes additional development stan-dards beyond those of the local zoning dis-tricts. Among the requirements are setbacks of300 feet or more on each side of streams drain-ing an area greater than 300 square miles andsetbacks of 50 feet for some federally-protect-ed wetlands.

Other communities are noted for their land-useplanning and habitat protection. For example:

• Baltimore County, Md., is credited for havingone of the most ambitious environmental pro-tection programs in the country with strate-

editor’s choice

U.S. citizens derive significant benefits in terms of physicalexercise, family well-being and stress reduction thanks to“free’’ recreationalopportunities.


gies for land-use regulation, acquisition projects, anurban-rural demarcation line and infill developmentinitiatives.

• Dane County, Wis., is mentioned for its efforts to stopsprawl and promote infill projects. Through an “out-side game’’ strategy, the county uses regulatory,acquisition and zoning tools to limit inefficient devel-opment and protect numerous water resources. Its“inside game’’ strategy involves work with cities andtowns to support redevelopment and infill projectswhile promoting affordable housing development.

Finally, some communities with unique ecosystems andsignificant populations of endangered plants and animalsare recognized for their efforts in the book. For example:

• Pima County, Ariz., gets credit in the book for aSonoran Desert Conservation Plan that focuses onbiodiversity. A 2004 bond election has given the proj-ect a substantial boost, with $112 million allocated forhabitat acquisition.

• Sanibel, Fla., also gains high praise for programs toprotect sensitive areas ranging from freshwater wet-lands to mangrove swamps. The Sanibel plan desig-nates six distinct ecological zones that allow for dif-fering levels of development to help protect the nativeand migrant wildlife such as birds, fish, manatees,alligators and occasional crocodiles.

In the end, Christopher Duerksen and Cara Snyderprovide extensive research and important, successfulexamples that REALTORS®, developers, planners andbuilders alike will find insightful, and necessary, for land-use planning that will protect the future of our coun-try’s ecosystem.

ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTLINKED

In the book, authors Christopher Duerksen and CaraSnyder point to numerous studies showing that naturalresource preservation can help retain jobs, attract newemployers and contribute to strong property values.Among the findings they cite:

• Together, recreation, parks and open space serve asthe top quality-of-life factor preferred by small com-panies, which tend to create jobs at a higher ratethan other businesses.

• Promoting tourism is an important economic devel-opment strategy and a 2001 study indicates annualnational expenditures of $40 billion associated withwildlife watching alone.

• A study for the state of South Carolina indicated taxpayer savings of $2.7 billion in capital infrastruc-ture over 20 years by encouraging higher-densitydevelopment.

• Several studies have shown that preserving undevel-oped land can save communities money, becausethe cost of providing public services to new residen-tial developments is not always recouped throughhigher tax revenues. In Lancaster County, Penn., thenegative fiscal impact of providing town services was$40 per household for urban infill projects and $147for scattered subdivisions.

• Proximity to natural areas boosts property values. InPortland, Ore., a public park of any kind within 1,500feet of a home increased the home’s sale price by $2,200.

Apeaceful view of mountains from the office wherebig city business deals are made. Acres of devel-opment-ready infrastructure unfettered by urban

bureaucracy and red tape. Savvy business proprietorsplying their trades Monday through Friday, then fly fish-ing and hiking on the weekends in their own backyards.

What may sound like non-sensical contradictions or anovelist’s flight of fancy are realities in communities allacross the country. Such communities — called micro-politans — exist throughout the United States and areattracting the attention of developers and residents alike,particularly those who want big city conveniences and asmall town feel.

But just exactly what is a micropolitan and why arethey factoring into America’s growth trends? The U.S.Office of Management and Budget in June 2003 intro-duced the following definition: “at least one urban clus-ter of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 in population.”

To put this in real terms, a true expert is essential and

Robert Lang fits the bill. Lang is the director of theMetropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech as well as anassociate professor in Urban Affairs and Planning. Hehas researched and written about micropolitans (ormicros) extensively.

“Micros sit on the fringe of metropolitan areas, butnot in the metro area. And it’s the size of the micro’s core— the principal city or cities — that matters. A micro-politan can be comprised of one or more counties, butthey are their own distinct places,” he said.

With their small cores but sometimes expansiveboundaries, micros are more rural and less intense thancities but more civilized and less rustic than traditionalrural areas. They frequently come with the promise ofcheap land and lower construction costs, plus fewerbureaucratic hoops to jump through than urban centers.

One in 10 Americans lives in a micropolitan. One outof five U.S. counties is a micro. Micropolitans grew bynearly eight percent in the 1990s.

the best of both worlds micropolitans

By Heidi Johnson-Wright


Lang is careful to differentiate micros fromexurbs, a concept with which they are sometimesconfused.

“Exurbs are a subset of the suburbs, and are stillpart of the metropolitan community and economy.Exurbs are located on the furthest ring of a metro-politan area. Micros sit outside of the metropolitanareas,” he explained.

People living in exurbs tend to commute backand forth to the core city, while micropolitan resi-dents can and often do live, work and play withinthe boundaries of the micro, without venturing intothe nearest metropolitan area. That is what makesthem attractive as growth areas.

While micros lack a large central city of over50,000 residents, they often contain central citiesakin to modest-sized towns, according to censusanalysis of 567 micros in the continental U.S. pub-lished by Lang and co-author Dawn Dhavale. Yetsome of the country’s largest micros are more thanjust overgrown towns; they are better characterizedas a new decentralized or countrified city.

“Micropolitans are as diverse as cities, as differ-ent as Detroit and Los Angeles,” Lang said.

“Some are poor, some affluent. Some are politi-cally conservative, some liberal. Some are raciallyhomogenous, some very ethnically diverse.”

Mt. Airy, N.C. sounds like a fictional town fromthe golden age of television: an honest-to-good-ness downtown with a Main Street, proximity to theBlue Ridge Parkway, a still-thriving, drive-in movie

theater and other quaint touches suchas a building bedecked with anauthentic antique Coca-Cola sign.

Indeed, Mt. Airy was the boyhoodhome of actor and small town Americaicon Andy Griffith. The town’s tourismWeb site address is VisitMayberry.com.But to dismiss this city as a sleepy little backwater would be a seriousmistake.

“Mount Airy has long been the eco-nomic hub for the county,” said Mt.Airy City Manager Don Brookshire.

“In the past this meant that it wasboth a retailing and manufacturingcenter that brought workers in whowould shop in our area. Beginning inthe late 1990s, the city began to feelthe impact of the global economy withthe loss of several thousand textile andfurniture manufacturing related jobs.At the same time, the community wasseeing the decline in the major agri-cultural crop of the region, tobacco,”said Brookshire.

But Mt. Airy, located 85 miles fromCharlotte with a micropolitan area population of71,000, found a way to adapt. Now the downtown isfocused less on retail and more on tourism. It’s cap-italized on being the hometown of not only Griffith,but also Eng and Chang — the world’s most

We have a diversified local mix of business and industry.


famous Siamese Twins — and country singerDonna Fargo. Located in the Blue Ridge foothills,the town is attracting hikers and bikers looking toexplore the surrounding natural beauty.

“We have a diversified local mix of businessand industry that offers both the old and the new.The serene and bucolic downtown is separated byabout a mile from a thriving street that is boundedby numerous chain and franchise establishmentsthat offer all that can be found in most cities of alarger size,” said Brookshire.

REALTOR® and developer Burke Robertsongrew up in Mt. Airy. He left for a while, living inmore urban areas, but came back to the citybecause he saw the potential here, which he terms“limitless.”

“Because of technology — fax machines, theInternet — you can live anywhere. I know a NewYork City mortgage broker who lives here. Anotherguy publishes three trade magazines that areprinted in Philadelphia and his graphics guy livesin Vermont,” said Robertson.

“The downside of technology is that it makesthings impersonal,” he said.

“But in a community like Mt. Airy, when you goto the grocery store you see the same people allthe time. You speak to them because you see them,even if you don’t know their names. That’s notsomething that happens in urban areas.”

Robertson believes that the area will continueto grow as a mature community, drawing fifty-somethings who are still vital and active but arelooking down the road to retirement. The cityappeals to people who are moving an existingbusiness or are looking to make a career change.

“Micros must avoid mistakes such as strip cen-ter development and contributing to traffic con-gestion. And you need a central core, a peopleplace,” he said.

Brookshire echoes similar sentiments. Hebelieves that the challenges for micros include“the competing desires to develop the communityfurther and add to the tax base versus the desire toretain the elements that make the community spe-cial; the need to enhance services to the popula-tion on a limited tax base and the recognition thatthere continues to be a shortage of high-paying,high-quality jobs for our residents.”

In contrast with Mt. Airy,Sheridan, Wyo. is a micropoli-tan located a long distance froma major metropolitan area. SaltLake City, Utah sits nearly 400miles away. But that’s not stop-ping city dwellers from the East, California and Coloradofrom moving to this mountaincommunity of just over 26,000people.

“We don’t have enoughhouses to sell to interested buy-ers,” said Sheridan REALTOR®

Vickie Farrington, who handlesprimarily residential sales.

“Prices are going up, but it’sstill much cheaper than the bigcities,” she said.

“People want to escape thebig city. This is a quiet commu-nity with little crime. Peopleleave their keys in their cars.They don’t lock their houses.And it’s inexpensive to livehere,” said Farrington.

Halfway between the Ohiobig cities of Cleveland andColumbus, Ashland celebratesits small town roots. The JohnnyAppleseed Heritage Center andOutdoor Drama is in the worksas a tribute to the folkloric fig-

We don’t have enough houses tosell to interested buyers…people

want to escape the big city.


Mt. Airy, North Carolina

ure who passed through this land of rolling hillsand beautiful hard wood trees. Those who drivethrough the city today still see members of thenearby Amish communities and their horse-drawnbuggies.

These bucolic images are as integral toAshland’s identity as the advantages it offers tobusinesses and developers. Existing warehousing,manufacturing and distribution facilities are avail-able. Considerable infrastructure and zoning arealready in place. The area’s manufacturing base insuch industries as plastics, machining, tooling, fab-rication, printing, rubber and chemicals means aready-made network with local suppliers, manufac-turers and distributors. The city has wisely createdan enterprise zone and tax incentives, as well as anEconomic Development Department to attractbusinesses.

“Ashland is the poster-child for a small,Midwestern city with a strong agricultural sectorbut also an impressive collection of manufacturingfirms,” said Evan Scurti, Ashland EconomicDevelopment specialist.

Scurti listed development measures that havebeen taken to shape Ashland’s micropolitan future.

“City-county cooperation to create our EconomicDevelopment Department in 2003, and to worktogether on the creation of our first business park;strong Economic Development/Ashland University

Business School partnerships, i.e. seminars, busi-ness counseling, etc. and much more regional part-nering with other small towns,” he said.

Paul A. Sears, dean of Ashland University’sCollege of Business and Economics, believes thatthe success of micros can be a two-edged sword.

“The biggest challenge that I see for micropolitancommunities is getting used to the idea that they areplaying a leading role in their geographic area. Ithink the citizens of these communities are so used tothinking about larger metropolitan areas as playingthe key roles that they simply are not yet comfortablewith the idea that they are key players in the econom-ic landscape of their region,” said Sears.

John C. Hovsepian, president of Ohio ToolWorks Corporation, a manufacturer of heavy indus-trial honing equipment, tooling and abrasive relat-ed products, located in Ashland, cites “people inthe community desire growth and expansion butwithin the established guidelines and standardswhich have been in place for many years.”

Hovsepian also feels a “lack of flexibility in workforce thinking” is a challenge to be overcome in thesmall town atmosphere of micro communities.

Mt. Airy City Manager Don Brookshire neatlysummed up the essence of the “micro mystique”that draws businesses and residents alike.

“A small town atmosphere where you can walkdown the street and be recognized isimportant…It’s about the quality of life in a com-munity such as ours.”

Johnson-Wright frequently writes about Smart Growthand sustainable communities. She and her husband livein a restored historic home in the heart of Miami’s LittleHavana. Contact her at: [email protected].

Micropolitansare playing a

leading role in their geographic area.


Photos provided by Sheridan, WY Travel and Tourism


With non-urban areas across thecountry gaining population atremarkable rates, it might lead

one to ask if the urban revival phenome-non is for real. Are people really returningto the larger cities?

According to Robert Lang, director ofthe Metropolitan Institute at VirginiaTech, the revival “was much more real inthe 1990s than it is now.”

“The 1990s were the best decade forAmerican cities since the 1940s. The1970s were the worst. (The numbers) willnever look as good as the ‘90s,” he said.

Even so, Lang questions how censusstatistics are interpreted. He posits thepossibility of undercounting, that the gov-ernment should be looking at householdoccupancy rather than sheer numbers.

“Cities have been losing families andgaining educated singles. Cities are get-ting richer. The trend in the hot coastalcities and hot Midwestern cities is thatthe cities are losing the poor and gainingthe rich,” Lang said.

Carol Coletta, host and producer ofthe nationally-syndicated public radioshow Smart City and president of CEOsfor Cities, agrees.

“Visit the center of most any big cityin America, and you’ll find new residen-tial construction underway. Much of thisdevelopment would have been unimagin-able just a dozen years ago. In fact,throughout the 1990s, the CensusBureau continued to insist that citieswere in decline. But the presence of con-struction cranes told a different story. So did the 2000Census. People were moving back into city centers forthe first time in decades, and that trend has only accel-erated in the first half of this decade,” said Coletta.

Coletta believes that “who” is more important than“how many.”

“The success of cities is no longer tied to populationgrowth. Instead, the education level of its citizens isnow the single largest driver of economic growth. AsAmerica’s college-educated 25 to 34-year-olds snap upnew urban condos and rediscover the appeal of city liv-ing, they are becoming the new ‘competitive advan-tage’ for cities,” she said.

Another trend is that of empty-nester Baby Boomersdownsizing and returning to the cities where they canenjoy cultural and other opportunities unavailable else-where.

Coletta believes that both trends show no signs ofslowing.

“Talented people tend to attract other talented peo-ple. So once development achieves critical mass, thetrend becomes self-reinforcing,” said Coletta.

“’Is the urban revival for real?’ Absolutely. The onlyquestion that matters for any city is ‘How do we get ourshare of the talented people who are driving this urbanrevival?’”

Is the Urban Revival for Real?

The Other Side of the Equation

Visit the center of most anybig city in America, andyou’ll find new residentialconstruction underway.


When it comes to appealing to homeowners,the charms of exurban development areobvious: Larger lots give residents more of

a country feel, removing them from the hustle andbustle of city life and giving them morespace to move about.

Despite the emphasis that has beenplaced on returning to America’s cities,planning experts maintain that mostfuture growth will occur in America’sgreenfields. Indeed, renowned NewUrbanist architect Andres Duany pre-dicts that as much as 95 percent offuture development will occur in exur-bia, according to an Urban LandInstitute report.

Exurban development has comeunder fire, however, from critics whocontend that the developments violateprinciples of Smart Growth, will lead tomore traffic congestion, more pollution,and more single-occupied vehiclesneeding to travel extra miles on

already congested highways.Some growth management planners, however,

say there are ways to combat this negative imageby designing exurbs that are appealing to home-

We Are Ready!

Daybreak in South Jordan, Utah


owners, by featuring amenities that make it morepleasant to stay in the neighborhood and provideincreasing transit options for when you leave.These neighborhoods also are embraced byregional planners because they are built withSmart Growth principles in mind.

It’s an idea called “transit ready” and it wascoined several years back by Harrison B. Rue, theexecutive director of the Virginia-based ThomasJefferson Planning District Commission &Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan PlanningOrganization.

Rue, a former REALTOR® and developer, says“transit ready” concepts are simple, inexpensiveto implement and, for the most part, reflect New

Urbanist principles. Mixed-use, high-densitycommunities that boast town centers are transitready neighborhoods. Other features include set-back sidewalks and bus stops in an urban layoutthat features plenty of street interconnection.

While transit oriented neighborhoods are builtto complement existing mass transit options avail-able to residents, transit ready developments focuson the long-term needs of the community. Theycan be small villages built in fringe exurban areasthat eventually mature into neighborhoods thatone day can absorb future mass transit options,whether it’s bus lines or light rail.

A prime example of a transit ready develop-ment is Daybreak, in South Jordan, Utah, a small

city of 40,000 that is about a 15-minuteInterstate drive away from Salt Lake City.Daybreak is advertised as “close enough tothe city world” but closer to the countryworld, “the world of hiking and bikingtrails and wide open spaces.”

A former greenfield at the base of theOquirrh Mountains on the southern end of

Developing neighborhoods apply Smart Growth principles to prepare for future transit needs.

Planning experts maintain that most futuregrowth will occur inAmerica’s greenfields.

By Christine Jordan Sexton


Salt Lake, Daybreak is a 4,200-acre residential,retail and office community being developed byKennecott Land, a sister company to KennecottUtah Copper. When built out to completion over thenext 15 years, the community will include morethan 13,000 energy-efficient homes, 1,250 acres ofwater-wise parks and open space, a large recre-ational lake, active town and village centers,schools, churches and transportation alternatives.

There is no mass transit serving the town today,but the community was built with future transitneeds in mind. Indeed, the addition of light railservice and expanded roadway access were includ-

ed in the master plan and Kennecott Land teamedup with four neighboring cities to form a communi-ty partnership that hopes to accelerate the plans toexpand the Utah Transit Authority light rail linethrough the Mid-Jordan area. There also are dis-cussions with the Utah Department ofTransportation to plan a new major highway, theMountain View Corridor, to provide access toDaybreak’s planned commercial center.

It’s that type of coordination that Rue says isessential to constructing transit ready develop-ments. “In the perfect world, the developer is work-ing with the planning department and the transitagency,” he said.

Daybreak was planned by the Berkeley-basedCalthorpe and Associates, which has made itsname focusing on New Urbanism, urban villages,transit oriented development and regional cities.

While Calthorpe associate Joe DiStefano saidDaybreak will be enhanced by future transporta-tion improvements, he stressed that the real assetsthat Daybreak offers its residents, and nearbyneighbors, is its smart land-use plan.

“This place will function well with or withouttransit,” said DiStefano, who said the communitywas planned with New Urbanism principles inmind so people can walk their children to school orwalk to the store or walk to work or a nearby park.

They still may need to drive their cars to otherparts of Utah today but the fact they can walk to apark, instead of drive, or walk their children to

The communitywas planned

so people canwalk their

children toschool or walkto the store or

walk to work ora nearby park.


school, instead of putting them on a bus, meansless congestion on roads, DiStefano said.

“Good land use and good urban design isalways a benefit,” said DiStefano, who saiddespite criticism to the contrary New Urbanismcan exist in formerly undeveloped greenfields.

Southwood in Tallahassee, Florida is anotherexample of a former exurban greenfield that mayultimately transform the long-term future of theentire region. For years developers had beenbuilding further and further northward in LeonCounty, edging closer to plantations and naturepreserves that straddle the Georgia-Florida line.There are major developments as much as 10 miles from the urban core of the small southern city.

Yet Southwood, which sits on 3,200 acres thatonce was part of a massive pine tree farm, actual-ly is only five miles southeast of downtownTallahassee and the Florida Capitol and is onlyminutes away from every major employer in theregion.

While mass transit isn’t an option for residentsnow, Rue said the community’s connectivitymakes it transit ready and that it adheres to hisprinciples of transit ready. Even before a singlehome was built, the St. Joe Company, owner of theland, convinced state government to build anoffice complex adjacent to the development,meaning that people can work just next to wherethey live.

“Overall, it’s a very nice plan,” Rue said in ane-mail after reviewing a map of Southwood. “Itlooks darned good: Good interconnections, lookslike good walk-ability details, decent amount ofdestinations.”

While Rue gave Southwood high marks for itstransit-friendly layout, Capital RegionalTransportation Planning Agency Interim

Executive Director, Jack Kostrzewa, describedSouthwood as a remote island that, he said, hascontributed to area traffic problems. Placing theFlorida State University magnet school, calledFlorida High, on Southwood’s campus meantincreased drive times for area residents with chil-dren in the program. He also was critical of a deci-sion to place a shopping center across fromSouthwood on the opposite side of a busy three-lane highway instead of inside the community.

“It looks to me more and more that it’s a retire-ment community,” said Kostrzewa.

Rue and DiStefano maintain, however, thatwell-designed greenfields will sidestep the mis-takes in developing so many of America’s suburbs.Those past mistakes they said include liningneighborhoods with meandering cul de sacsinstead of having connected arterial roads thathelp traffic flow. Another typical mistake isdesigning streets without shaded sidewalks.

Developing green, open areas, the two men say,doesn’t contradict the New Urbanism principlesthey defend as sound. Additionally, DiStefano saysthat it’s inevitable that the areas be developed.

“It’s not a concession,” he said. Instead hecalled it a recognition that “There’s no way we canaccommodate 100 percent of our future growth inexisting areas.”

Christine Jordan Sexton is a Tallahassee-based free-lance reporter who has done correspondent work for theAssociated Press, the New York Times, Florida MedicalBusiness and a variety of trade magazines, includingFlorida Lawyer and National Underwriter.


Farmsthe future of

By Brad Broberg


As long as people need food, there will befarms. The question facing more and moreregions of the country is where.

With growth and development invading ruralAmerica, fields and pastures are disappearing. Andnot just any fields and pastures. The farms mostthreatened by growth — those nearest urban edges— are also some of the richest and most productive.

“What we’re most concerned about is develop-ment on prime farmland,” said Jill Schwartz, directorof marketing at American Farmlands Trust. “There isa lot more prime farmland being developed now thanin the past. Every state in the country is experiencingit in some way.”

Why it’s happening, what it means and how com-munities are responding are important questions. Askey pieces in the Smart Growth puzzle, the answersreveal the complexity — and importance — of tryingto balance two highly conflicting demands on rurallands.

American Farmland Trust (AFT) is a nonprofitorganization dedicated to preserving productivefarmland. An AFT report entitled “Farming on theEdge: Sprawling Development Threatens America’s

Best Farmland” contains a bumper crop of statisticsthat illustrate the pressure growth is placing on agri-culture.

Although due for an update — the report is basedon figures from 1992-97 — there is no reason to thinkthe trends the report identifies have waned, saidSchwartz. During the five-year period covered by thereport, more than 6 million acres of agricultural land— an area the size of Maryland — were lost to devel-oped use. What’s more the rate of loss — 1.2 millionacres per year — was 51 percent higher than from1982-1992.

There’s worse news, though. Prime land vanished30 percent faster than non-prime land. As the loss ofthe best farmland shifts more production to marginalland, the quality of crops suffer, more chemicals mustbe used and the food must be transported greater dis-tances, said Schwartz. In addition, the farmland mostthreatened by development is often situated in one-of-a-kind microclimates capable of growing particu-lar fruits and vegetables that don’t grow as well any-where else, she said.

Sadly, most of the development pressure is fallingon small family farms — an American icon increas-

in America

ingly under siege. There is, however, growing con-cern for what’s at stake — crops, jobs, open spaceand a way of life — when farmlands disappear.“We’re seeing a great trend toward awareness,”said Schwartz.

Across the country, a number of public and pri-vate entities are saving farmlands through directacquisition, purchase or transfer of developmentrights, new economic development strategies andSmart Growth — with the greatest successes com-ing when the various approaches are combined.

Take Lancaster County, for example. About 90minutes west of Philadelphia, the county has man-aged to accommodate a substantial population —500,000 — without compromising its $1 billion ayear agriculture industry. While the county con-tains more than 330,000 acres of farmland, only49,000 acres is formally preserved through pur-

chase of the land and/or development rights. Therest is protected by the county’s Smart Growth poli-cies. “Preserving farmland is not enough,”explained Richard Doenges, director of theAgricultural Preserve Board, which oversees thecounty’s purchase-of-development rights program.“You have to have good land-use planning. That’swhy we’ve been effective here.”

In 1993, Lancaster adopted a growth manage-ment plan that set out to steer 80 percent of futuregrowth into urban growth areas rather than allow-ing it to sprawl. After coming close to hitting itsgoal — 76 percent of the county’s growth subse-

quently occurred in the targeted areas — the coun-ty is now revising its goal to 85 percent.

Lancaster County is not stopping there. Thecounty has established a Blue Ribbon Commissionto promote policies and strategies that will keep itsfarms economically viable — and less prone to besold for development — in the years ahead.

Sandwiched between Baltimore and Washington,D.C., Montgomery County, Md., also is taking acomprehensive approach with zoning as the founda-tion. After first trying — and failing — in the 1970s topreserve farmland by establishing minimum lot sizesof five acres in agricultural zones, it raised the mini-mum lot size to 25 acres in 1981.

The down side of down zoning is the loss ofpotential value farmers experience. One way localgovernments can compensate farmers is to offer tobuy development rights — that is pay a farmer thedifference between the land’s agricultural valueand its developable value in exchange for prohibit-ing the land from ever being developed for non-farm use. Montgomery County is employing a vari-ation of that strategy that involves the transfer ofdevelopment rights (TDR).

“It’s a little bit different [than buying develop-ment rights] because the private sector pays for thetransferred rights,” said John Zawitosky, director ofplanning and promotions for the agricultural serv-ices division of the county’s economic developmentdepartment.

The program enables farmers to sell the right todevelop portions of their property to developers.The developers can then use those rights to devel-op property elsewhere — typically in a designatedgrowth area — at higher densities than otherwisewould be permitted.

In some ways, it was only a matter of time beforethe needs of growth and agriculture would begin tocollide and the country would find so much of its

Preserving farmland is notenough…You have to have

good land-use planning.

Lancaster County, Pennsylvania


food supply — 86 percent of fruits and vegetablesand 63 percent of dairy products, according to theAFT — square in the path of development.

Historically, the country’s most fertile areaswere settled first, giving rise to towns and citiesthat, in the days before modern food preservationand transportation, needed to be within a wagonride of their food supply. As the towns and citiesgrew, they gradually ate up the closest farmland.

The issue today, though, is not growth per se.It’s the gluttonous nature of contemporary growth— insatiable in its appetite for open space — thatraises red flags. According to “Farming on theEdge,” the acreage per person for new housingalmost doubled over the 20-year period leading upto the report. “In the 1990s, almost half of residen-tial development occurred on 10 to 22 acres [perlot] — that’s what’s causing the problem,” saidSchwartz. “So many people want a big piece ofland. They’re not interested in urban infill.”

There’s a term for this type of development —exurbs. Neither fully suburban nor fully rural,exurbs mix low-density housing with active farmson the far fringes of urban centers. “Exurbia…isthe fastest-growing development type,” said JillClark, program manager of the Exurban ChangeProgram at Ohio State University, which is analyz-ing the impact of exurbia on that state.

As appealing as exurban life is to many citydwellers — more bang for their home-buying buck,less congestion, a better environment to raise a fam-ily — there’s a price to pay for that style of develop-ment. When the economic climate in a county shiftsfrom farming to development, longtime agriculturalindustries that have driven local economies for aslong as 200 years often begin to wither.

It all starts when development pressure makesfarms worth more as potential subdivisions or Wal-Marts than they are as corn fields or dairy pas-

tures. “Land evolves to its highest and best use,”said Randy Hertz, owner of Hertz FarmManagement/Hertz Real Estate Services inNevada, Iowa, and incoming president of theREALTORS® Land Institute. “Unfortunately, landthat is highly suitable to farming — level, well-

It was only a matter of time before the needs of growth and agriculturewould collide.



drained — is the most suitable for development.Builders love it.”

As a result, farmers are getting “very, verytempting offers” to sell, said Schwartz. Typicallythe farm is their nest egg. And since fewer andfewer children of farmers want to take over thefarm, selling the farm for development becomes thebest way for farmers to provide for their retirementand/or pass along an inheritance to their children.

Even so, there’s more behind the transformationof farmland than soaring property values. After all,just because farmers can sell their land for a wind-fall doesn’t mean they must. In fact, most farmersprobably would prefer not to sell their land fordevelopment, said Wendy Wieland, agriculturalbusinesses development specialist with theNorthern Lakes Economic Alliance in upstateMichigan. “If farming is profitable, people willcontinue to do it,” she said.

Wieland works with farmers to become moreentrepreneurial and derive added value from theirland and labor. Strategies include creating region-al brand identities, assuming more responsibility

for processing their products and switching fromgrowing low-priced commodity crops such asgrains to higher-priced specialty crops such asorganic produce. “The most sustainable farmlandpreservation tool is to make farming more prof-itable,” she said. “It’s hard work, but it’s a tremen-dously satisfying way of life.”

That’s why the Hoffman family hangs on.Together, the Hoffmans — Joe Sr., sons Joe Jr. andPaul and nephew Bill McMaster — farm a com-bined 350 acres in Bear Creek Township in upstateMichigan. Joe Jr. and Paul represent the fifth-gen-eration of the family to work the soil there.

Unlike so many of the township’s other farmers,the Hoffmans have resisted the pressure of devel-opment. “It’s the love of the land and the history ofthe land — that’s what keeps the few farmers left inthe township going,” said Joe Jr., whose great-great-grandfather settled there in 1877.

Long popular as a summer playground for thewealthy, scenic Bear Creek Township ultimatelybecame an equally popular place for people tobuild homes. “Sometime in the 1960s and 1970s is

If farming is profitable, people will continue to do it.


when the development push really started,” saidHoffman. “If we had started (trying to save farm-land) 20 years ago, we’d be a lot better off.”

Today, Bear Creek provides a case study of theforces that make balancing the needs of agricul-ture with the demands of development so chal-lenging. Much hinges on zoning. In Bear CreekTownship, farmland can be carved into one- andtwo-acre lots — perfect for sprawling developmentbut the antithesis of Smart Growth.

Another huge issue — not just in Bear CreekTownship but across the country — is the advanc-ing age of most farmers. As they retire, their chil-dren frequently are not interested in taking overand other farmers cannot afford to pay the pricethat a developer would. “In the last 10 years, therewere a lot of 60- and 70-year-old farmers here withno one to take over the farms so they were soldand developed,” said Hoffman.

Once the cycle of farmland conversion gainssteam, it can be tough to stop. When farms startdisappearing, so does the infrastructure to supportthem — livestock auctions, feed stores, tractordealers — which forces the farmers left behind totravel greater distances for important services.

What’s more, the development-inflated price offarmland — not to mention the dwindling supply— prevents family farmers from expanding andgaining the economies of scale necessary to copewith increasing global competition.

Development does, however, offer a few silverlinings. “Certainly development has a dramaticimpact on farming and rural communities,” saidHertz, “but some things are good.”

The good things can include jobs for farmerswho want — or need — to work off the farm.Hoffman, for example, works in quality control fora nearby electronics company. In addition, devel-opment provides farmers with an opportunity todirectly market their crops to a nearby population.Hoffman’s cousin, McMaster, does a brisk busi-ness selling his produce on his farm at Bill’s FarmMarket.

One of the keys to balancing development andagriculture in rural America is Smart Growth, saidBob Fleck, owner of Caldwell Banker FleckAgency REALTORS® in Danville, Pa., and a mem-ber of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REAL-TORS® Smart Growth Advisory Group.

“What I’d like to see is a little more density,” hesaid. “We need to get away from these one-acre lotsand 10-acre lots. What I hope is the cities and smalltowns…can persuade people to move there.”

About an hour north of Seattle in SkagitCounty, Wa., a push is underway to do just that,plus generate revenue for the county’s farmlandpreservation program. If approved by local gov-ernments, the initiative would allow developers topay to exceed normal density limits in downtownBurlington, one of the county’s biggest cities. Thatrevenue would then flow to the county’s pur-chase-of-development rights program, where itwould be used to protect farmland outsideBurlington that the city might otherwise annex toaccommodate growth.

“There will be property owners who won’t beinterested in selling their development rights, butthere will also be property owners who will be,”said Bob Rose, executive director of Skagitoniansto Preserve Farmland, a nonprofit organizationthat is pushing the initiative. “The hope is thatinstead of the city expanding outward, there willbe a greenbelt of farmland.”

As our cities continue to expand, the future ofthe farm is critical, and we must find a balancebetween development and the protection of ouragriculture.

Brad Broberg is a Seattle-based freelance writer special-izing in business and development issues. His workappears regularly in the Puget Sound Business Journaland the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.

One of the keys to balancing developmentand agriculture in rural

America is Smart Growth.

In most metropolitan areas in the U.S., populationgrowth pushes outward into suburban cities. Thisgrowth has leapfrogged along since the end of

World War II, gobbling up land at an astonishing rate.Despite the efforts of Smart Growth advocates andthe New Urbanism, the predominant developmentpattern is still the conventional suburban model,which typically uses land in a haphazard, even waste-ful fashion while segregating uses, effectively forcinghomeowners to use their cars for even brief errands.Now, with first-, second-, and third-ring suburbsstarting to burst at their poorly planned seams, a“next-ring suburb” is threatened: rural counties withsmall, traditional towns.

Residents of many of these rural areas have seentheir population and development rates spike inrecent years. Horrified at the potential for skyrocket-ing real estate values, congestion, and lack of servic-es, and their often dense, traditionally planned com-

munities degenerating into a suburban wasteland ofbig boxes and cookie-cutter subdivisions, residentsare sometimes reacting with knee-jerk swiftness.

In West Virginia’s Berkeley and Jefferson Counties— both within a two-hour drive of Washington, D.C.— populations have increased by 30 and 20 percent,respectively, since 1990. Seeing this writing on thewall, residents of Scrabble in Berkeley County earlierthis year pooled their money and bought a 300-acrefarm for $3.6 million, effectively shielding it from acrowd of developers clamoring to call it their nextsubdivision.

Other efforts to shield land from development ofany kind include the National Park Trust’s late-1990spurchase of School House Ridge, a historic Civil Warbattlefield in Harpers Ferry, W. Va., which was thentransferred to the National Park Service.

Maury County, Tenn., grew by only seven percentduring the 1980s. But between 1990 and 2000,

READY, SET…


…GROWTH

Rural Counties Preparefor Development


By Jason Miller


spurred by the opening of a Saturn manufacturingplant in Spring Hill, the population jumped by 31percent. In the late ’90s, residents of Columbia andMount Pleasant, Tenn., formed historic districts toprotect old homes and traditional downtowns, andset up a land trust to preserve open space.

The population of Douglas County, Nev., hasleaped 56 percent since 1990. Opponents of thegrowth — old-timers and newcomers alike —approved a November 2002 ballot initiative thatlimited the number of new houses to 280 per year,which is half the current rate. Three months later, acounty judge overturned that initiative.

And in TroupCounty, Ga., whichlies outside the 20-county Atlantametro area, the res-ident count is start-ing to rise in simi-lar fashion.

None of these reports should come as a surprise,says Troup County planner Rick Morris. “You cango anywhere in the nation and basically draw a cir-cle within an hour, hour and a half of a city, and yousee growth,” he says. The rise in populations ofrural counties are inevitable because of the wayAmericans have traditionally grown: from the cen-tral city outward. Today’s reality is that more than60 percent of the 100 fastest-growing suburbancounties were not part of metro areas 30 years ago.

The rural counties that are reacting to surges

with effective yet patchwork strategies, such asScrabble’s scramble to buy up land piecemeal,sometimes have little other recourse. But the coun-ties and municipalities that are pursuing a SmartGrowth approach appear at present to have thebrightest future — the most hope for creatingand/or maintaining a built environment that sup-ports the way they want to live.

A comprehensive land-use plan is arguablySmart Growth’s most useful tool for counties andthe municipalities within them. Essentially a blue-print for development, a comprehensive plan or“comp plan” describes how a region wants to

develop over thecoming decades— typically for thenext 30 years.Most comp plansinclude at leastthe followingcomponents:

Demographicstudies: How willthe populationchange? How willthe critical demo-graphics of resi-dents under age18 and those overage 55 change?

Land use: Where will residential, commercial,industrial, retail, etc. be located, and are they com-patible?

Transportation: All transportation modes shouldbe planned, in order to function most efficientlyand safely.

Parks, recreation, open spaces: Is the quantityand quality sufficient? Are they spaced properly orin a crazy-quilt fashion? Are natural resourcesbeing preserved?

A comp plan is fluid — to a point. Each munici-

The counties andmunicipalities thatare pursuing aSmart Growthapproach appear atpresent to have thebrightest future.


pality in the U.S. develops its comp plan to reflectthe shared values and goals of its residents. Someprefer aggressive growth; others favor preserva-tion of existing open space, such as farmland. Andin most areas, farmland is exactly what’s in dan-ger of disappearing.

Educating municipalitiesDue west of Chicago, Kane County, Ill., is still

mostly rural, peppered with farms and communi-ties that were established before Chicago existed.Yet even with its slower pace, Kane is one of themost progressive counties in the nation. “Duringthe past 30 years, Kane County has taken compre-hensive planning very seriously, even though, asin the rest of Illinois, it doesn’t have real powerover the municipalities within it,” says Kai Tarum,director of planning with Kane County.

Using a combination of in-person visits withmunicipalities and county board chairs, plus part-nerships and workshops — the most recent work-

shop in March 2005 was co-sponsored by theNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® —Kane County officials take a “soft sell” approach,encouraging each municipality to create its owncomprehensive land-use plan in concert with theone developed by the Kane County RegionalPlanning Commission, which upholds the 10 prin-ciples of Smart Growth:

1. Mix land uses;2. Take advantage of compact building design;3. Create a range of housing opportunities and

choices;

4. Create walkable neighborhoods;5. Foster distinctive, attractive communities

with a strong sense of place;6. Preserve open space, farmland, natural

beauty, and critical environmental areas;7. Strengthen and direct development toward

existing communities;8. Provide a variety of transportation choices;9. Make development decisions predictable,

fair, and cost-effective; and10. Encourage community and stakeholder col-

laboration in development decisions.Dubbed the 2030 Land Resource Management

Plan and adopted by the Kane County Board inOctober 2005, this particular comp plan doesn’tjust attempt to fulfill platitudes like “‘improvingthe quality of life for all residents,’” says Tarum.“We’re trying to incorporate Smart Growth princi-ples, to create a series of what we call ‘priorityplaces’; i.e., locations where safe, healthy and liv-able communities are being planned. We’re trying

A comprehensive land-use plan is arguablySmart Growth’s mostuseful tool for countiesand the municipalitieswithin them.

to introduce these ideas to an edge county, andsome of these ideas are really hard to swallow fora lot of people. They’ve come out here to have theiracreage, but we can’t afford to keep growing thatway. For example, some land-use decisions createa burden on the county to expand the road system,and we don’t have the money to do that.”

Kane County’s smaller rural towns are underpressure for development, says Christy Sabdo, anexecutive planner with Kane County. “We’re upagainst municipalities that want to grow by doubleor even triple, in order to accommodate waste-water treatment plants to remedy the older, failingseptic systems. We’re trying to work with these

towns to retain their farmland and keep the growthunder control so they don’t expand all at once — togrow incrementally, even make the plans smaller.We’re looking for density and walkable, daily con-veniences. We’re looking for public transportation.We’re looking for town centers.”

Working as a coordinator for its townships’ com-prehensive plans, Kane County’s planning com-mission aligns its efforts with each municipality,trying to compromise and accommodate as much ofthe townships’ desires with its own goals andobjectives.

Is a comprehensive land-use plan necessary?“That’s like asking why grass has to be green,” saysTarum. “It’s crucial. Every municipality has a comp

plan, and that’s a good thing. Expansion fromChicago has almost gone around us, but now it’scoming at us from all sides.”

“Based on 2004 estimates, Kane County willalmost double by 2030,” says Sabdo. “So it’s up tous and the municipalities to manage that growth.”

REALTOR® Christine Klein grew up in ruralKane County and has witnessed tremendousgrowth over the past several years. “Most of thewestern side is filled with smaller communities thatare annexing the surrounding farmland into theirvillages, then developing it into residential housing— nothing but residential,” says Klein.

This reality affects her work in two ways, saysKlein. “First, it’s increasing the housing inventory.That growth can be a positive thing, as long as wecan keep up with the growth by offering services,schools, and police and fire protection. Andbecause the houses that are getting developed arein the upper price ranges, that can have a positiveeffect on the existing communities as well, by rais-ing the tax base and home values, and attractingcommercial interests to the area.”

But Klein admits that value can have a downside, too. “The developers face lots of fees, such asimpact and roadway fees, and transition fees. Thiscan be a burden for new buyers, because thebuilders don’t absorb those costs, they just passthem on to the buyers. This drives up the averageprice in the area, which in turn drives up the valueof the existing homes. So whether it’s a new homeor an existing home, the houses become almostunaffordable to most people.”

Striking a balanceSouthwest of Minneapolis, Minn., Scott County

holds the title of the state’s fastest-growing countyand the 12th fastest-growing county in the U.S.,

We try to put policies into place in a way to guide

growth in an efficient and appropriate way.


The future of Scott County, Minnesota?

having boomed by 58 percent in the 1990s andcurrently adding 6,000 residents per year.

Unlike Kane County, Scott County has land-use authority, which gives it control over growthmanagement, including planning and zoningfunctions, in its 11 townships and 8 cities, and inits rural areas (this is unique; only one other coun-ty in Minnesota, Carver County, has this level ofauthority). But Scott County doesn’t try to wield abig stick in its relations with its municipalities,says Tom Kreykes, AICP, principal planner.

“Each city does its own comprehensive plan,and we’re trying to create a comp plan that worksfor Scott County, but also meshes with our munic-ipalities and the guidelines from the MetropolitanCouncil” — the government planning entity thatregulates the seven-county metro area surround-ing the Twin Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

“We try to integrate the cities’ representation asmuch as possible,” says Kreykes. “We want toknow what their plans are for areas beyond theirboundaries, so that we can anticipate land use. Weknow annexation is going to occur; we simplywant to establish orderly annexation agreements,we want general knowledge on what land areasare expected to become urban rather than rural —so there are no surprises. We have no control overmarket forces, but we try to put policies into placein a way to guide growth in an efficient and appro-priate way.”

For Kreykes, the biggest driver behind a com-prehensive plan is the notion of balance: balanc-ing the needs of the stakeholders in the communi-ty. And that can be the biggest challenge, he says.

Perhaps development of our rural lands wouldn’tbe an issue if the predominant development pat-tern in the U.S. followed the tenets of SmartGrowth and the design guidelines of the NewUrbanism. But this is usually nothing more thanwishful thinking.

“Practically anywhere you go in the country,there will be those who are pro-growth and wantdevelopment, and there will be those who want topreserve open space. But you can’t please every-body. You need to strike a balance with regard tothe needs of your community. Putting together agood comp plan requires lots of research, but italso requires public input. You need to try to getpeople thinking from a community standpointrather than a special interest perspective, thengather their feedback for the county as a whole.Because if you can’t garner public support, thenthe finest comp plan in the world isn’t going to goanywhere.”

Jason Miller is a freelance writer, editor and publishingconsultant based in Auburn, Washington.

You need to strike abalance with regard

to the needs of your community.


in your town


HiddenTreasuresBy John Van Gieson

Driggs, Idaho, and Elkhorn City, Kentucky, are similar in size,roughly 1,200 residents. Each is blessed by a scenic location.Driggs sits in the middle of Idaho’s Teton Valley, a short drive over

the Teton Mountain range from the luxurious resorts at Jackson Hole,Wyoming. Elkhorn City sits on the west bank of the Russell Fork of theBig Sandy River in a beautiful gorge cutting through the Appalachianswhere Kentucky borders on Virginia.

The similarities end, however, when it comes to planning for a futurethat will preserve each town’s unique characteristics and provide eco-nomic opportunities for its residents. In that sense, Driggs and ElkhornCity are positioned at the polar extremes of the growth and planningissues affecting rural America.

Driggs is booming, attracting a mix of retirees, affluent second-homeowners and resort workers looking for affordable housing — which isscarce to non-existent in Jackson Hole. If all the residences either pro-posed by developers or permissible under the current zoning codewere built, the Teton County population would jump from about 6,000to more than 40,000, said Kathy Rinaldi, operations director of ValleyAdvocates for Responsible Growth.

Elkhorn City has been sliding down a long backwards slope, losingnearly 3,500 residents over several decades as hard times in the coaland railroad industries battered the Eastern Kentucky economy.

“Our economy was for years, and still is to some extent, coal-based,and the coal industry just doesn’t have jobs,” said Timothy Belcher, alocal attorney who was instrumental in founding the Elkhorn CityArea Heritage Council.

Fortunately for Driggs, Elkhorn City and countless other smalltowns in rural areas across the country, visionary planners, archi-tects, academics and just plain local folks are working on visionarysolutions to rural planning and growth issues. The Your Town pro-gram, which was started by the National Trust for HistoricPreservation and is now run by the National Endowment for theArts, holds numerous design workshops that bring concerned citi-zens and civic leaders together to discuss solutions to problemsaffecting their communities. Both Driggs and Elkhorn City hostedYour Town charettes.

“A lot of rural planning today is concentrated on two things:revitalizing decaying or deteriorating downtowns, and introduc-ing new businesses on main street,” said Shelley Mastran, a his-toric preservation consultant from Reston, Va., who worked for theNational Trust. “The other side of the picture is trying to savesmall towns from being engulfed in sprawl. As metropolitan areassprawl further and further out a lot of small towns just get suckedup and destroyed.”

Kennedy Smith, a co-founder of the Community Land Useand Economics Group in Arlington, Va., is a former director ofthe National Trust for Historic Preservation's National MainStreet Center. She is considered a leading expert on downtownrevitalization.

“They believe they have one problem and in reality theyoften have several different problems,” Smith said.

One of the keys to revitalizing the town center in smalltowns is to prevent commercial development on the skirts fromsucking the life out of downtown businesses, Smith said. Theconstruction of big box stores on the outskirts has doomed thedowntown in many a small town. Revitalization planners musteither devise strategies to discourage sprawl or develop spe-


Maintaining your small town’s economic viability with Smart Planning.


cialized downtowns that offer different attrac-tions than the huge chain stores.

A planning for the future approach that isworking in many areas is “heritage tourism”— capitalizing on the small town communityhistory or natural resources as a draw for vis-itors whose spending will stimulate local busi-nesses. With Your Town’s assistance, ElkhornCity is developing a river trail, promotingcanoeing and kayaking on the river and hik-ing in the mountains, planning a Pioneer Village,developing an arts trail designed in part by aprominent Japanese artist, and emphasizing thearea’s role in Kentucky history.

“We’re using art to effect social change and revi-talization,” Belcher said. As for history, “DanielBoone’s first step in Kentucky was actually inElkhorn City,” he said.

Also focusing on heritage tourism is theMississippi Hills Heritage Area Alliance coveringall or part of 30 counties in Northeast Mississippi.The area gave the nation an eclectic group ofartists including Elvis Presley, Howlin’ Wolf,Tammy Wynette, Tennessee Williams, WilliamFaulkner and John Grisham. It was also the site ofimportant Civil War battles where Union troopsunder General Ulysses S. Grant defeatedConfederate forces.

“People care about their history, and they careabout their heritage,” said Kent Bain, coordinatorof the Mississippi Hills Heritage Area Alliance. “If

you can make them recognize what’s importantabout the heritage of their community, then theywant to preserve it. If you come in and say let’s dosome planning, then they want to run you out oftown.”

The Alliance operates out of space provided byREALTOR® Judy Glenn in her Corinth,Mississippi, office. Glenn is a former member ofthe NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®

Board of Directors and currently serves on theStrategic Planning Committee. She was part of agroup of Corinth leaders who decided more than 20years ago that their town was deteriorating andneeded to be revitalized.

“At that time we had problems,” Glenn said. “Ona block where there were five buildings probablytwo of them were occupied and three were vacant.”

Now Corinth, population 15,000, has a vibrantdowntown featuring regular free concerts atCourthouse Square, a marketplace written up inSouthern Living magazine, a thriving communityof artists and artisans, and a children’s music con-

Driggs, Idaho (above) attracts second-home owners and retirees,while Elkhorn City, Ky., (right) capitalizes on tourism.


servatory. The National Park Service has con-structed a new $9.5 million interpretive center atthe Civil War battlefield park.

“There are places to eat now and live and workand play and interact downtown,” Glenn said.“We don’t have a Starbucks, but you can still geta cup of coffee in a downtown drug store that’sbeen in business since the 1800s for 50 cents.”

And Corinthians like to remind visitors that it isthe home of the “slug burger,” a local delicacymade of beef and breading deep fried to a goldenbrown.

Small town revitalization and attraction fre-quently involves capitalizing on the advantagesthat local folks know they have. In Valley,Alabama, however, a plan to develop a new down-town in a community that had lost numerous jobs

when four textile mills closed focused on turninga local eyesore into an asset.

The Your Town Alabama program, a statewiderevitalization program copied from but independ-ent of the NEA’s national Your Town program, wascreated in 1998 to provide assistance to strugglingtowns throughout Alabama.

“There are a lot of the little towns in Alabamathat hit their economic heyday in the 1950s and1960s,” said Paul Kennedy, a U.S. Department ofAgriculture natural resources manager on loan tothe organization that runs Your Town Alabama.“Some downtown streets are 80 percent vacant.The kids when they graduate from high schoolrun out of town as fast as they can. I wanted to dosomething to help them.”

When Your Town Alabama held its first work-

Heritage tourism —capitalizing on the

small town communityhistory or natural

resources as a drawfor visitors.


shop in 1998, Valley City Clerk Martha Catoattended as a substitute for another official whocouldn’t go. The experience changed her life.

“We went to Your Town, and we found that plan-ning was an answer for us,” Cato said. “We totallygive Your Town credit for putting us on the rightpath.”

Valley was created 25 years ago by combiningfour communities along the banks of theChattahoochee River that had fallen on hard timeswhen their textile mills closed.

Planners who worked with Valley suggested thetown, population 9,000, purchase the 500,000-square foot Langdale Mill, built in 1866, and con-

vert into the centerpiece of a new downtown. “Had we not gone though the Your Town

process, we wouldn’t have ever known how impor-tant that mill was to us,” Valley Mayor Arnold Leaksaid in an interview with the Community ArtsNetwork.

The town paid $300,000 for the mill and is plan-ning to convert it into a hotel and convention cen-ter, restaurants, a regional farmers’ market andcondominiums. The project is going so well, thatcity leaders are now considering the purchase of asecond mill.

Valley and Elkhorn City may be small towns, buttheir advocates think big.

There is no one rightanswer when it comes

to revitalizing and preserving small

towns and attractingnew residents to

the towns.

Cato said Valley is developing a recreational trailalong the river, is considering textile and railroadmuseums, and she is talking to officials in other statesabout developing an historic textile corridor alongInterstate 85 from Alabama to Greenville, SouthCarolina.

Belcher dreams of a passenger train transportingtourists over scenic mountain railways betweenKentucky and South Carolina.

Even Driggs, where the overarching issue is con-trolling growth, is taking advantage of its resources topromote the town to visitors. Self said the Teton River,just east of town, is known for its fine cutthroat troutfishing and birders come from far away to view thetrumpeter swans and sand hill cranes along the river.

In fact, say revitalization advocates, there is no oneright answer when it comes to revitalizing and pre-serving small towns and attracting new residents tothe towns.

“I would say that people who are looking to revital-ize or preserve their areas shouldn’t be looking for asilver bullet,” Glenn said. “They should look for avariety of things that can be put together as an incen-tive for all.”

John Van Gieson is a freelance writer based in Tallahassee,Florida. He owns and runs Van Gieson Media Relations,Inc.


Special Recognition

p SMART PLANNING IN THE SMALL TOWNThe NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (NAR) Smart

Growth Program and the city of Ash Grove, Missouri, were hon-ored with an Excellence in Planning Award from the MissouriChapter of the American Planning Association in September2005 during its Annual Conference in Kansas City. The award for“Outstanding Community Initiative” was in recognition of AshGrove’s Smart Growth Initiative.

In Spring 2004, Ash Grove, through its Mayor, REALTOR®

Brenda Ellsworth, and the Greater Springfield Board ofREALTORS® , requested assistance from NAR’s Smart GrowthProgram to initiate a program to plan for the city’s future. AshGrove, with a population of approximately 1,500, is 20 milesfrom rapidly-growing Springfield and is expected to see signifi-cant growth in the near future. According to Mayor Ellsworth, shebegan the planning initiative because of the community’s desireto “maintain our character and sense of community in the faceof growth. Most small-town leaders do not have the neededknowledge to make that happen and do not have the funds tohire the person that does.” Ash Grove was selected as the firstcity in the U.S. to receive this extensive level of assistance fromthe NAR Smart Growth Program. With funding from NAR andadditional support from the Greater Springfield Board of REAL-TORS®, A. Nelessen Associates, a nationally recognized planningand design firm from Belle Mead, New Jersey, was selected toconduct visioning and planning workshops over a four-day periodin Ash Grove.

More than 120 Ash Grove residents, business owners andother stakeholders attended the workshops. Participants com-pleted visual preference surveys and questionnaires on land-usepolicies, and worked in teams to create maps representing theirrecommendations for growth. Planners from A. NelessenAssociates were assisted by volunteer planners from NAR, thecity of Springfield, and the planning faculty, staff and studentsfrom Missouri State University, who worked to turn the citizens’recommendations into a preliminary development plan for AshGrove which was presented to the public on November 20.

“The partnership between Ash Grove, NAR, the local REALTOR®

board, and the university was so important to the success of thisplanning effort,” said Joe Molinaro, Manager of NAR’s Smart GrowthProgram. “And the fact that so many citizens participated is a testa-ment to Mayor Ellsworth’s leadership.”

Soon after the planning event, citizen working groups wereformed to further pursue many of the ideas developed in the pre-liminary plan, and the city is currently working to incorporate theoutcomes of the process into a comprehensive plan and updatedland-development regulations. The preliminary plan also providedthe impetus and support for the city’s application for fundingfrom the Missouri Department of Transportation to install side-walks and plant trees along major roads in the city, and thesefunds were recently awarded.


in

with Smart Growth

new townsrural areassaving rural space

By Brad Broberg


When growth comes to rural counties, itcan splatter the landscape withsprawl.

Yet it doesn’t have to be that way.A pair of new communities — one in Missouri

and the other in Florida — are among the latestexamples of rural development that accommo-dates growth without chewing up open space.

“I think people are ready for another choicecompared to a typical rural subdivision,” saidGreg Whittaker, president of Whittaker Homes.“Those people out there looking for big lots, Idon’t think they realize, in my opinion, the dam-age they’re doing to the environment.”

New Town, a 5,700-unit community WhittakerHomes is building on 740 acres outside St. Louis,Mo., is anything but a typical rural subdivision.The same goes for New River, a 4,800-unit com-munity outside Tampa being developed on 1,800acres by KB Home.

Surrounded by farmland, both tread muchmore lightly on the land than the conventionalapproach to rural development in which super-sized lots — anywhere from one to 10 acres perresidence — dominate.

Higher density is not, however, the only thingthat sets New River and New Town apart. Planscall for each to evolve over the next decade intoself-contained towns containing parks, schools,churches, stores and offices. “We’re not justbringing the rooftops, but everything to supportthe rooftops,” said Marshall Gray, president of KBHome’s Tampa division.

New Town is the first development of its kindfor Whittaker Homes, one of Missouri’s leadinghome builders, but it won’t be the last. “We’relooking for more sites right now,” said Whittaker.“I truly believe this is the way people will bebuilding in the future.”

Gray agrees. KB Home is one of the nation’sbiggest home builders. Currently, about 25 per-cent of the company’s developments fit the moldof New River. However, over the next five to 10years, two-thirds of the company’s developmentswill follow that blueprint, said Gray. “It’s really allabout Smart Growth,” he said

New Town incorporates many of the principlesof New Urbanism. Conceived in response tosprawl, the New Urbanism movement promotesdevelopment that includes traditional town cen-ters, distinct yet compact neighborhoods, a vari-ety of housing choices — everything fromdetached single-family homes to apartments —and narrow streets that tame traffic while encour-aging walking and biking. “Cars come last in ourdevelopment,” said Whittaker.

That’s just fine with New Town residents Deeand James Devereux. “We love the concept thatyou can walk anywhere,” said Dee. “Where welived, you had to take a car wherever you went.”

The Devereuxs moved to a single-family homein New Town from a large house on a half-acre ina nearby subdivision. “We’re both in our 60s andthe yard was a lot of work,” said Dee. “We have asmall yard now and we like the size of it.”

They also appreciate the turn-back-the-clocklifestyle — evening conversations on their frontporch with neighbors, free movies in the outdooramphitheater and trips to the grocery store bybike. “What I’m hearing from other people is theylove the concept just like we do,” said Dee.

Once considered novel, New Urbanism hasgained greater acceptance with each new com-munity as people see more and more examples ofsuccessful projects, said Gray. “People share bestpractices all across the country,” he said. “Whenyou can talk to builders and developers and inter-view homeowners and business owners, it’s all apositive.”

New Town in St. Charles, Missouri


While often associated with urbaninfill, transit-oriented developmentand/or suburban redevelopment,New Urbanism also makes sense inrural settings, where it allows peopleto live in the country without eliminating the envi-ronment they came for in the first place.

The prototype for New Urban development isSeaside, Fla., which inspired Whittaker to buildNew Town. “I’d been going there for 14 or 15years,” he said. ‘That’s where the thought camefrom. You park your car and you don’t have to getback into it for a week. We thought about doingsomething similar for years. We were just waitingfor the right time and place to move forward.”

Designed by the same firm — Duany Plater-Zyberk & Co. — that designed Seaside, New Townhas by most accounts progressed faster than anyother traditional neighborhood development (TND)to date. The first residents moved in last spring bare-ly more than two years after initial design began — atestament to New Town’s thoughtful planning. “Most

projects have issues in terms of people worried abouttraffic and schools,” said Whittaker. “That didn’t hap-pen with this project.”

Paralleling New Town’s speedy progress hasbeen its popularity with homebuyers. “The amountof interest in this project has been unbelievable,”said Whittaker, noting that more than 6,000 peoplesigned up for a mailing list that provides the latestinformation on the community’s progress. “We’vepushed up the opening of later phases because ofthe demand.”

Despite the popularity of places like New Town,New Urban communities are still the exception.Consequently, authorities often must be convincedto relax various land-use regulations to allow thehigher densities and mixed uses that are a NewUrban community’s bread and butter. “Everything

We love the concept that you

can walk anywhere.

New Town in St. Charles, Missouri

we’re doing in New Townbreaks all the normalrules,” said Whittaker. Asan example, he cited NewTown’s live/work units inwhich a business is locat-ed on the first floor with aresidence above.

While not an example ofNew Urbanism per se —the housing style is morereflective of suburban sub-divisions than urbanneighborhoods — NewRiver also breaks somemolds. “It’s not rows ofhousing, but pockets ofhousing surrounded bylarge open space areas,”said Gray. New River alsowill feature a 200-acretown center with 180,000square feet of office space,500,000 square feet of com-mercial space, schools,government offices and a207-acre park.

Gray said developersmust be “smart negotia-tors” and “educate electedofficials” in order toremove potential barriersto their projects. Forinstance, a city or countymay tie the amount of res-idential development itallows to a certain amountof commercial develop-ment that must occur atthe same time. The prob-lem is that if businessesopen before enoughhomes are completed,they may not survive, saidGray. New River solved that dilemma by winningapproval to build its commercial components instages that will guarantee enough people are liv-ing in the community to support the businessesbefore they are built, he said.

Meanwhile, at New Town, transportation is achallenge. Whittaker is working hard to bringtransit — another building block of NewUrbanism — to his community. “We’re trying toput a trolley from New Town to Main Street in the town of St. Charles,” he said. “That would be

a dream.”But even with a multitude of challenges in the

two towns, the outcome far outweighs the time-consuming negotiating process, difficult zoningregulations and design obstacles. In the end, it isa valued community, which these examples clearly show.

Brad Broberg is a Seattle-based freelance writer spe-cializing in business and development issues. His workappears regularly in the Puget Sound Business Journaland the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.


New River, outside Tampa, Florida

Authoritiesoften must be convincedto relax variousland-useregulations.

America is a nation with an unquenchablethirst for developing land. And the majority ofthat growth is in the ever-expanding suburbs.

Planners, researchers, developers and even thestaunchest conservationists concede that there is noway to stem the demand for suburban and exurbangrowth. So the bottom line is — if it is a foregone con-clusion that growth in the U.S. will continue to occurfarther and farther from central cities — what can bedone to make sure that growth is smart, not sprawl?

The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has published TenPrinciples for Smart Growth on the Suburban Fringeto outline clear, attainable methods for solving the sprawl riddle while building the best urbanismpossible.

Michael Pawlukiewicz, ULI’s Director ofEnvironment & Policy Education, directed the teamthat compiled the report that opens with the stagger-ing fact that “across the country, land is being devel-oped faster than ever before: more than two millionacres of open space is converted each year.”

“We know there will be a lot of growth in the U.S.According to the Census Bureau, we’ll grow by 50million people in the next 20 years,” Pawlukiewiczsaid. “Even though we would like those people to livein cities or close-in suburbs, the fact is most of thepopulation growth will continue in the farther sub-urbs.”

Pawlukiewicz also noted that even though peoplewill continue moving to the fringe, this nation canbuild with better development patterns to avoid theproblems that sprawl development of the past 50years has given us. Sprawl has created traffic jams,degraded the environment and misused land.

“We have to move toward compact nodes of devel-opment,” he said. “As we identify appropriate sites forthese development nodes we must also make sure weidentify and protect land for recreation, agricultureand habitat conservation. We have to make sure thatdevelopment and the protection of natural areas andresource areas go hand in hand.”

Pawlukiewicz said transit-oriented developmentcan be a powerful tool for Smart Growth — but com-munities must be sure to coordinate transportationinvestments with planning for smarter land use. Healso stressed the importance of promoting compact,walkable and mixed-use communities where every-one has transportation choices including walking,public transportation and driving.

Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Instituteat Virginia Tech and part of the research team for theTen Principles publication, said suburbia needs tofocus on Smart Growth principles such as buildingcompact multifamily subdivisions that conserve land.

“When preserving green space, it must be inte-grated into an overall plan. Much of suburbia’s green


problem of sprawlSolving the

10 Principles for Smart Growth on the Suburban Fringe

areas are chopped up in pieces and don’t really add up toa habitat,” he said. “Typical exurbia is comprised of multi-family homes adjacent to retail and separated by a pedestri-an-unfriendly fence or large lot single family homes built chock-a-block.”

Lang said a conventional subdivision built without using SmartGrowth principles typically has very limited connectivity that abutsretail and is often separated by a wall. He noted the irony that a res-ident in a subdivision house closest to retail actually has the farthesttrip because he must wind through the subdivision to reach way outand over to it.

“Without Smart Growth principles, the cycle is cheap — develop-ers come in and build chock-a-block and conservation principles arenot used. It’s not an enduring form,” he said.

Pawlukiewicz said local land-use policy must have a vision for anappropriate and sustainable future and then organize policies, codesand regulations to make it easy and profitable for the private sectorto implement that vision.

“Everybody blames developers for sprawl and while they are notwithout fault, most of what they develop is in keeping with publiczoning codes and land-use regulations,” Pawlukiewicz said. “In mostsuburbs, sprawl is easy and profitable to build. Local governmentsare mostly responsible for regulating land use. Their policies make itdifficult to build mixed-use communities or use better urban-designpractices like putting buildings close to the street or to narrow thestreets to make them safer for pedestrians. The codes and regulationsmust be changed so that it is easy and profitable to do the right thing,the smart thing. The sprawl that we see in the U.S. is, in fact, theimplementation of public policy.”


with examples adapted from the ULI text. Please visit the Urban LandInstitute’s Web site, www.uli.org, for information on how to obtain a complete copy of the report.

1

2

3

4

5

10Principles for Smart Growth on the Suburban Fringe

Create a Shared Vision for the Future…and Stick to It

A successful visioning process is rooted in a commu-nity’s landowners, developers, elected officials, envi-ronmental groups, citizen activist groups and localbusiness. Temptations will emerge that run counterto the vision in the form of appealing short-term eco-nomic development opportunities. If a way cannot befound to make the proposal enhance the vision, itshould be rejected.

Identify and Sustain Green Infrastructure

Green infrastructure is a network of habitat, parks,greenways, conservation easements and workinglands sustaining native species, natural ecologicalprocesses, plus air and water resources. Between1982 and 1997, the amount of urbanized land in theU.S. increased by 47 percent while the nation’s pop-ulation grew by only 17 percent. Considering thosenumbers, it becomes obvious that green infrastruc-ture is a community’s natural life-support system andmust be strategically planned and managed as care-fully as built infrastructure.

Remember that the Right Design in the WrongPlace Is Not Smart Growth

Traditional design — with its back alleys, front porch-es and spaces where kids play and neighbors con-

gregate — is critical, but not the only component ofSmart Growth. Design must be integrated with localclimate, land conditions, transportation facilities andeconomically viable development that preservesopen space and natural resources, infrastructure thatserves existing and new residents, compact devel-opment such as new town centers, and other factorsthat take a holistic approach to stamping out sprawl.

Protect Environmental Systems and ConserveResources

Take advantage of building orientation, prevailingwinds and tree cover for cooling. Manage the effectof the sun’s rays for enhancing or limiting heating.Conserve water by using conservation-designedappliances and plumbing fixtures, harvested gray-water, recycled water and natural (non-piped)drainage systems and pervious paving to rechargeaquifers.

Provide Diverse Housing Typesand Opportunities

Direct growth to walkable mixed-use subdivisionsthat offer more diverse housing types such as:rental and ownership of single-family houses withyards, townhouses and multi-family apartmentbuildings to meet the varied lifestyles of people living in the suburbs.


6

7

8

9

10

Build Centers of Concentrated Mixed Uses

Sustainable urbanized fringe development has aconvenient mix that meets people’s daily needs:homes, schools, stores, services and amenities. Aconcentration of mixed uses on the fringe providesa critical mass and a sense of place that gives com-munities a strong identity and a heart. Mixed-useprojects create a destination with housing, employ-ment, retail and public services. Successful com-munities include a full range of uses and activities:office, retail, entertainment, hotels, housing andcivic institutions.

Use Multiple Connections to Enhance Mobilityand Circulation

Traffic congestion is a big problem in conventionalsuburbs because clusters of residential subdivi-sions with only one entry and one exit concentratethe traffic onto and off arterial roads, which quicklybecome clogged because of the lack of connectivi-ty and alternative routes. To avoid becoming aplaceless collection of disaggregated subdivisions,a network made up of vehicular, pedestrian, cycling,park and open-space connections must beplanned. Communities should create a template fora street grid with a hierarchy of connected streets toguide development and promote connectivity.

Deliver Sustainable TransportationChoices

Smart Growth communities provide a range oftransportation choices, but to be sustainable, these

alternatives must be built in rather than added laterto a car-based culture. Staged development of realestate and transportation facilities ensures that arange of options will be available to travelers —walking, cycling, transit, carpooling, telecommutingand driving — and that each will be adequately sup-ported.

Preserve the Community’s Character

America’s commercial landscape, largely due to theproliferation of chain stores and franchises, hasdeteriorated from the unique to uniform, from styl-ized to standardized. National franchises and chainstores can change their standard building designsto fit local character, but only do so in communitiessavvy enough to reject off the shelf architecture anddemand customized, site-specific design thataddresses local historic preservation, site planningand vernacular architectural concerns.

Make It Easy to Do the Right Thing

One major barrier to better development on thefringe is local regulation. Most local zoning and sub-division regulations make it easier and faster tobuild conventional low-density, auto-dependentdevelopments than undertake Smart Growth on thesuburban fringe. Developers build sprawling proj-ects because they are easier and cheaper to con-struct. Local officials should make local regulationsmore flexible to encourage mixed uses, narrowerstreets, compact development and other smartpractices.



The states ofW a s h i n g t o n ,Wisconsin, and

Pennsylvania have a com-mon interest in encourag-ing their local govern-ments to guide communi-ty growth and change.But they are taking differ-ent paths to that objec-tive. Washington hasbeen administering a full-scale growth manage-ment law since 1990 thatrequires most local gov-ernments to plan andimplement specific devel-opment strategies to con-form to state objectives.Wisconsin adopted simi-lar provisions just sixyears ago, but with thecritical difference that the

state allows local governments great latitude todetermine the policies and regulations they willemploy. Pennsylvania, taking a different tack, hasfocused on a series of programmatic approaches forconserving open space and revitalizing existingurban areas, all pointed to improving the state’seconomic development. This status reportdescribes how the three states’ actions to date areinfluencing the forms and functions of communitydevelopment.

States Opt Into the Planning GameFor much of the 20th century, states rarely inter-

fered with local governments’ involvement in com-prehensive planning and zoning. That all changedin the 1970s in what some experts called “a quietrevolution in land-use control.” Mounting dissatis-faction about rampant, poorly coordinated growthprompted many states to instruct local govern-ments to prepare comprehensive plans and imple-menting regulations according to state require-ments. Oregon’s pathbreaking legislation in 1973established the model, requiring local govern-ments to adopt comprehensive plans consistentwith state objectives, to be reviewed by state agen-cies, and providing an appeals process to resolveissues emanating from applications of the new law.Florida followed suit with similar requirements in1975 that were strengthened in 1985, then camestate legislation promoting better local planning inNew Jersey, Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island,Georgia and Washington.

Meanwhile, other states focused on offeringmonetary or programmatic incentives to guide keyaspects of community development. For example,Vermont’s Act 250 in 1970 required state permitsfor large-scale developments. Maryland’s 1997“Smart Growth” act required local governments toidentify priority areas for state infrastructure fund-ing. Tennessee’s 1998 legislation mandated inter-jurisdictional collaboration to define future growthand annexation areas. As of 2005, dozens of stateshave intervened in local policymaking to influencethe course of local community development. Theexamples of Washington, Wisconsin andPennsylvania demonstrate the variety of approach-es they are using.

Washington’s “Omnibus” Growth Management ActWashington adopted its Growth Management

Act (GMA) in 1990 and strengthened it in 1991,during a period of growth in which the state gainedover a million new residents and employment hadrisen by 574,000 jobs in a decade. Scrambling tomanage unprecedented development, the statecrafted a growth management program for urban orurbanizing counties that required them to adoptcounty-wide planning policies as a framework formandated county and city comprehensive plansand implementing development regulations, allconsistent with 13 state goals. Counties also wererequired to designate urban growth areas in con-sultation with municipalities and both levels oflocal government were instructed to designate crit-ical areas, agricultural lands, forest lands, and min-eral resource lands and adopt regulations to protectthem from urban development. All plans and regu-lations are subject to comment by the state land useagency and guided by decisions of three appealsboards. The American Planning Association calledthe GMA “one of the most comprehensive andmodern planning statutes in the country.”

After 15 years of experience in implementing theGMA, Washington has established some thought-fulness and predictability for development andconservation in most parts of the state. However,the Act’s sweeping requirements have generatedconcerns about the sheer amount of time and effortrequired to respond to its provisions, the frustra-tions of balancing the GMA’s ambitious but com-peting goals, and the difficulties of modifying pastpatterns of development to conform to new expec-tations for clustering development and protectingnatural resources and critical areas. One increas-ingly insistent issue is steep rise in home prices.Local plans are supposed to guarantee a 20-yearsupply of buildable land, but building industry rep-


SteeringGrowth

By Douglas R. Porter

State Government Attempts


resentatives complain that NIMBY-driven densityceilings, inadequate infrastructure investments,environmental set-asides and other factors thatreduce the availability of developable land are driv-ing up land and housing prices. A 1979 state lawbacked by the real estate industry required the sixmost urbanized counties to estimate amounts ofbuildable land in designated growth areas, but theresults showed more land is available than the fore-casted need. Quibbles over “availability” criteria andforecasting methods could lower estimates to somedegree but apparently land supplies are capable ofmeeting market demands for many years.

Nonetheless, industry representatives, as well asthe 1000 Friends of Washington organization, havespotlighted a reality gap between official planninggoals and actual performance in developing afford-able housing. State and local officials appear to befocusing more on designating growth areas than onestablishing meaningful targets and initiatives forproducing affordable housing within them. Henry W.McGee, Jr., writing in the Washington UniversityJournal of Law & Policy, concludes that the GMA’s

housing goal “remains a destination without thebarest directions to achieve its objective.”1 Perhapsthat calls for greater state and local attention to oper-ationalizing the GMA goals.2

Wisconsin Tests the Water of State Smart GrowthWisconsin’s Comprehensive Planning Law, which

took effect in 2000, was hatched through a collabora-tive process involving representatives of local gov-ernments, builders, REALTORS® and conservationand planning interests. They reached consensus thatthe state’s 1,922 local jurisdictions sorely neededmore and better planning but the group resisted stateintrusion into local decision making. According toTom Larson, representing the WisconsinREALTORS® Association, the framers of the lawviewed Oregon’s and Washington’s rather elaborategrowth management programs as overly restrictive.They preferred to leave decisions about the use ofspecific techniques such as urban growth boundariesor concurrency up to local officials. Instead, theywrote the law to spur local governments to plan, toprovide a more predictable context for development,

Washington has established some thoughtfulnessand predictability for development and conservation in most parts of the state.

1 Henry W. McGee, Jr., “Equity and Efficiency in Washington State’s GMA Affordable Housing Goal,” Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, Vol. 3, 2000, p. 546.2 This section is drawn from a paper by Douglas Porter, Evaluation of Local Implementation of the Washington State Growth Management Act, 2004, which can be found

on the NAR Smart Growth Web site: http://www.realtor.org/smartgrowth.


but otherwise to minimize state involvement.However, the legislature provided planning grantsto assist local governments and will continue grantfunding at $2 million annually for the next twoyears. The hope was, and is, that the amount andquality of communication within and between juris-dictions will lead to more informed decisions thatwill result in Smart Growth.

The law defines nine elements in a comprehen-sive plan, from housing and transportation tointergovernmental cooperation and implementa-tion. It also requires, by January 1, 2010, consis-tency of all community land-use programs andactions with the community’s comprehensiveplan. A popular provision requires public partici-pation at every stage of the comprehensive plan-ning process, including notice to adjoining juris-dictions, regional agencies and certain otherorganizations and jurisdictions. According to LisaMcKinnon of 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, this pro-vision has raised the level of public interest andinvolvement in planning.

As might be expected, the goals and qualities ofthe 369 plans submitted by mid-2005 to the state by

counties, cities, towns and townships vary tremen-dously. Some focus on protecting open space, otherson stimulating job growth, and some clearly areintended to mute growth. Says Larson of the REAL-TORS® association: “This is a messy process,involving people with many kinds of interests.”McKinnon adds: “If the process is locally controlled,they get what they want.” But Joanne Schumann,the program’s grant administrator, says that reason-able, well-rounded plans are also being created,many in places that had never before prepared aplan. “At least they are learning about planning,”she says. Nevertheless, naysayers are circlingaround looking for reasons to repeal the law, requir-ing Governor Jim Doyle in July 2005 to veto legisla-tion that would have abolished it.

Pennsylvania: Going for the GreenPennsylvania has taken a different path toward

improving the quality of local governments’ plan-ning and regulatory efforts. In 1997, GovernorTom Ridge initiated a series of state programs topreserve open space and farmland and stimulatecommunity revitalization, which subsequent gov-ernors have continued and expanded. The pro-grams have found favor with the PennsylvaniaBuilders Association.

Even after the massive downsizing of its manu-facturing base from the mid-20th century onward,the Commonwealth’s economy ranks as the 16thlargest in the world. Still, a recent BrookingsInstitution analysis (Back to Prosperity: A

Pennsylvania GovernorTom Ridge initiated a

series of state programs topreserve open space and

farmland and stimulatecommunity revitalization.


Competitive Agenda for Renewal of Pennsylvania)concludes that the state is shedding young andskilled workers, experiencing a net population out-migration, and losing the fiscal stamina to maintaincivic infrastructure, and the Commonwealth con-tinues to convert rural to urban land, mostly inouter suburbs where 72 percent of the state’s hous-ing production occurred in the past decade. Thereport concludes: “Slow growth is still bringing fastsprawl.”

Planning for growth and change by the state’s2,667 local governments has always been a chancyprocess. The state law authorizing local compre-hensive plans provides that local regulatory actionsneed not be consistent with local plans — a provi-sion, comments Richard Bickel, of the DelawareValley Regional Planning Commission, that: “effec-

tively favors zoning laws over plans as the authori-tative force in guiding growth.” Attempts duringthe 1990s to strengthen municipal comprehensiveplanning came to naught.

Determined to regain forward momentum in theCommonwealth’s economy, Governor Ridge issuedan executive order in 1999 declaring that “sustain-ing the economic and social vitality ofPennsylvania’s communities must be a priority ofstate government.” In the past six years, GovernorsRidge, Mark Schweiker and Edward Rendell havewon legislative authorizations of $1.8 billion infunding over 12 years for programs packagedunder the terms “Growing Greener” “GrowingSmarter” and “Growing Greener II” (the lastsigned into law in July 2005 after voter approval).Programs funded by the initiatives included

The state has required counties to prepare plans,authorized counties and municipalities to designate

growth areas and encouraged use of transferabledevelopment rights.


restoration of streams and wetlands, reclamationof abandoned mine lands, plugging of inactive oiland gas wells, farmland protection, state park andlocal recreational improvements, wastewater anddrinking water improvements, increased cleanupof the state’s 12,000 vacant and contaminatedindustrial sites, and revitalization of “MainStreet” downtowns and adjacent residentialneighborhoods.

Funding for bond issues to support these pro-grams came from state landfill dumping fees, andthe state reached out for matching funding fromlocal governments, associations, schools and col-leges, clubs and environmental groups. KurtKraus, Press Secretary for the Department ofEnvironmental Protection, credits the infusions of

open space funding with major enhancements ofwatersheds throughout the Commonwealth andsignificant increases in open space preservationin some growing counties such as Bucks, Chesterand Montgomery. In addition, according toKenneth Klothen, Deputy Secretary for theDepartment of Economic Development, thedepartment has been charged with improvingcoordination among more than a dozen stateagencies to achieve consistency of project appli-cations with local comprehensive plans and toassemble interagency support for state funding torevitalize core communities.

Also, the state has required counties to prepareplans (most have), authorized counties andmunicipalities to designate growth areas and

encouraged use of transferabledevelopment rights to conserveopen space and farmland.Municipalities have been grantedpowers to adopt multi-local plansthat promote more rational land-use patterns across municipalboundaries — and also provide ameans of avoiding developers’“curative amendments” that canforce unwanted housing develop-ment.

The positive leadership andguidance provided by these statesdemonstrates the potential powerand range of approaches thatstates can employ to influence thequality of local community devel-opment.

Douglas Porter, president of theGrowth Management Institute inChevy Chase, Maryland, regularlymonitors and writes about stategrowth management programs.

THE GOVERNOR’S INSTITUTE ON COMMUNITY DESIGNThe National Endowment of the Arts, in cooperation with

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, created TheGovernor’s Institute in mid-2005 to assist top state leadersin establishing state policies to profoundly affect growth pat-terns, community design and environmental quality. Workingwith governors, their cabinet members and their staffs, theInstitute hopes to encourage state leaders to pursue plan-ning and design approaches that improve the livability ofcities, suburbs and rural areas. The Institute will conductworkshops and provide advice on technical issues and policyoptions that will achieve this goal. Modeled in part after thesuccessful Mayors’ Institute on City Design, the workshops

will bring governors and other key state officials together withplanning and design experts to identify and evaluate strate-gies that respond to specific development challenges con-fronting the states represented in the discussions.

Three former governors with a long history of promotingSmart Growth — Christie Whitman of New Jersey (also formerEPA Administrator), Parris Glendening of Maryland and AngusKing of Maine will lead the effort. The Institute will be jointlyadministered by the Smart Growth Leadership Institute andthe National Center for Smart Growth Research andEducation at the University of Maryland. (More informationcan be found at www.govinstitute.org.)

smartGrowthinthestates

In July, the San FranciscoMetropolitan TransportationCommission, responsible for planningand funding the region's transporta-tion, adopted a Transit OrientedDevelopment (TOD) policy that ties acommunity's transit funds to higher-density zoning around new transitstations and provides bonuses forincluding affordable housing in devel-opments near transit centers. The goalof the policy, according to a commis-sion planner, "is to get more people ontransit and reduce subsidies." StuartCohen, director of the advocacy groupTransportation and Land UseCoalition stated, "When transit linesare surrounded by a sea of parkinglots of big box stores, people wonderwhy transit is empty. Housing is keyto making transit work."

Denver is in the process of rewriting itszoning code, something it has not donein nearly 50 years. The rewrite wasprompted by "Blueprint Denver," theupdated comprehensive plan adopted in2002. The goal of the rewrite is to pro-tect the character of existing neighbor-hoods by encouraging higher-densityand mixed uses along certain corridors,but keeping density and scale smallerapproaching established single-familyresidential areas. Higher-density proj-ects would be encouraged to locate nearmass transit (and thereby increase tran-sit ridership). The city is creating a"Main Street" zone that would encour-age mixed-use projects incorporatingresidential, retail and commercial com-ponents. The new code will be a form-based code, characterized by a relianceon diagrams that portray a desiredresult, rather than more familiar wordy(and often confusing) proscriptive codes.

CALIFORNIA COLORADO

Compiled by Gerald L. Allen, NAR Government Affairs

CONNECTICUT


This year, the ConnecticutLegislature passed a bill providingadditional funding for the state'songoing efforts to preserve farm-land. The bill, Senate Bill 410, AnAct Concerning FarmlandPreservation, Land Protection,Affordable Housing and HistoricPreservation, dedicates $6.5 mil-lion for each of the four programsnamed in the bill’s title.


Senate Bill 112, signed by GovernorRuth Ann Minner (D), streamlines theprocess of developing brownfield sitesby providing authority to establishdurable and enforceable environmentalcovenants that run with the land. Thebill also provides for a process to amendor eliminate the environmentalcovenant if the conditions that gave riseto its need no longer exist. The estab-lishment of such covenants provides ameasure of confidence in the sustain-ability of brownfield cleanups andenables property transactions to occurmore easily. In this way, the bill willhelp return previously contaminatedproperties to the stream of commerceand allow owners and prospective pur-chasers of brownfield properties to pur-sue risk-based cleanups.

The Collier County Commissionhas granted final approval to themassive Ave Maria Universityand Township development.When completed, the develop-ment will include a 6,000 studentRoman Catholic university,11,000 homes, a population of24,000 people and supportingpublic facilities and commercialand retail development. Themajor concern over the develop-ment is its environmental impact.

FLORIDADELAWARE

The Oldham County EconomicDevelopment Authority is planningan Economic Development Campuson 1,069 acres located south ofInterstate 71 and west of KY 53. Theproposal includes a mix of offices,retail, housing, parks, trails andplazas. At the outset, a zone changeis required to change the existinglow-density residential and conserva-tion zoning to Planned UnitDevelopment. Oldham County andLaGrange County would each sell$10 million in revenue bonds tofinance the first phase of the projectwhich would include an office andbusiness park. Revenue from proper-ty sales would cover the bonds. Theentire project may take as much as20 years to complete.

KENTUCKY


The "Village CenterPlan" proposed byFlorida-based LNRProperty Corp. for rede-velopment of the sprawl-ing 1,450 acre SouthWeymouth Naval AirStation cleared all threelocal approval hurdles inseparate town meetingand town council votesin the towns of Abington,Rockland andWeymouth. Although thezoning approvals are ahuge step forward, thereare still many permits,both state and local, tobe obtained before the2,800-unit mixed-usedevelopment basedlargely on New Urbanistprinciples can begin con-struction.

Once mostly rural andrecently a fast-growingTwin Cities bedroomcommunity, Ramsey isready for more newcom-ers with its SmartGrowth vision, embod-ied in the 350-acrepedestrian-friendlyTown Center projectunder construction. Theproject is located on oneof the MetropolitanCouncil's designated''opportunity sites'' andis the winner of the2005 American Instituteof Architects (AIA)Award for Regional andUrban Design.

Creve Coeur wants todevelop a downtown dis-trict and its planning com-mission modified a plan toincrease protection for res-idents and businesses inthe area. The city's down-town would be on 45 acresand it would take five min-utes to cross on foot. Likea traditional downtown,the proposed special dis-trict plan for downtownwould contain a mixture ofstores, offices and housingin buildings close to thestreet. The streets wouldbe in a grid pattern and asnarrow as possible to han-dle traffic at a slow pace.The downtown wouldinclude a park and somecommunity facilities.

MASSACHUSETTS MISSISSIPPIMINNESOTA MISSOURI

smartGrowth inthestates (continued)

Photos provided by Sheridan, WY Travel and Tourism

Some 100 architects, plan-ners, transportation special-ists, and other professionalsfrom across the U.S. met inMississippi October 11-18 tohelp lead a massive planningeffort aimed at rebuilding atleast nine of that state’sstricken coastal communi-ties, including Gulfport,Biloxi and Pascagoula. Thefirms involved are workingfor a fraction of their usualfees and will team up withlocal architects and planners,said Miami architect-plannerAndres Duany, who is coor-dinating the program onbehalf of the Congress forthe New Urbanism.''Everything is optional.Nothing will be imposed.They will create the toolsthat people can adopt or notas they choose,'' he stressedafter his earlier meetingswith Mississippi GovernorHaley Barbour (R) and areaofficials.


Municipal leaders in northMecklenburg are now plan-ning for the North Corridorcommuter rail, anticipatedfor 2010. Leaders are talkingabout where the train willstop in their communitiesand what kinds of develop-ment will surround the stops.The municipalities ofCornelius, Davidson,Huntersville, Charlotte andMatthews have adopted a setof guidelines called theTransit Station Area JointDevelopment Principles andPolicy. These guidelines cre-ate multi- and mixed-use sta-tion areas intended to sup-port development favorableto transit.

The U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) inJuly announced that Cheyenneis one of five communitiesselected to participate in itsSmart Growth Program,designed to provide cities tech-nical assistance. Cheyenne wasselected in part because itsrecently completed comprehen-sive planning efforts, Vision2020 and Plan Cheyenne,incorporated Smart Growthconcepts. For example, PlanCheyenne calls for "pocketneighborhoods" that combinevaried housing types, pedestri-an access, parks, and retail andemployment. Developing acode to encourage such devel-opment is where EPA's expert-ise will come in.

NORTHCAROLINA

WYOMING

The New York State Association of REALTORS®

(NYSAR) honored the town of Warwick, which islocated 55 miles northwest of New York City inOrange County, with the first-ever NYSAR Award forSmart Growth Excellence in recognition of the town’ssuccessful efforts to incorporate the principles ofSmart Growth into its comprehensive plan.

The town of Warwick aggressively implementedSmart Growth concepts into their comprehensiveplan, which established a farmland protection pro-gram and put into place innovative zoning tech-niques. Warwick’s plan is designed to: preserve thetown’s rural character and as many operating farmsas possible; to direct growth toward already vibrantsettled villages and hamlets; and to provide signifi-cant and unique natural areas that are important forboth ecological reasons and for wildlife habitat. TheSmart Growth initiatives eliminate the encroachmentof residential housing on to productive farmlands bycreating incentives to have development transferredto and around already settled villages or hamlets.

“Our comprehensive plan is a win for everyonefrom our residents to developers and the futuremembers of our community,” said town of WarwickSupervisor Michael P. Sweeton. “It allows us to pre-serve what Warwick’s 30,000 residents love abouttheir community — its rural character and our agri-cultural heritage — while allowing development nowand in the future. This plan was a community-wideeffort.”

The new zoning ordinance encourages clusterdevelopments, walkable neighborhoods, affordablehomes and open space preservation. Since theadoption of the code, all proposed subdivisions havebeen clustered, preserving an average of 60 percentof the site as open space, and lot values have sinceincreased by as much as 50 to 75 percent.Affordable housing aspects of the code require devel-opers to provide at least 10 percent of a new subdi-vision as affordable housing. It also encouragesdevelopment that imposes less impact on the com-munity by allowing private and narrower roads withless curbing, thereby reducing runoff and calmingtraffic.

The plan was a collaborative effort by the entirecommunity, which has remained active, aware andinvolved throughout the process. As Albert E.Caccese, director of conservation and governmentrelations for Audubon New York put it, “This thought-ful and innovative program will encourage communi-ties around the state to consider Smart Growth prin-ciples as they plan for the future. It recognizes thatSmart Growth isn’t just a quality of life amenity thatis good for the environment, but is also a boon tobusiness and the economy.”

What’s happening in New York to Preserve the Rural?