http://smartgrowth.org

42994 10/03 • 04-099

“It’s nice to have a single document describing many different

strategies to refer to as a resource.”

Diane Paoni, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, 

Bureau of Planning, Madison, Wisconsin

“I work with towns all over the state for free technical

assistance and this will be a fantastic resource for tools for

municipalities and counties.”

Joyce DeLaurentis, Community Development Director, 

Maryland Rural Redevelopment Corporation, Greensboro, Maryland

“I think it is an excellent document and will help our leaders

shape the future of Northern California.”

Rich Theis, Leadership Institute for Ecology and the Economy, 

Sebastopol, California

“100 Policies is a great book.We are going to make this one

mandatory reading for the city’s aldermen.”

Mayor Fred Brereton, 

City of Belvidere, Illinois

“We are currently working on the preparation of our new

General Plan and this book appears to offer some great ideas

for incorporating specific policies and programs to incorporate

sustainability and smart growth into our Plan.”

Pamela Tuft, AICP, Director of General Plan Administration, 

City of Petaluma, California 

“A couple of months ago, I ordered and received 15 copies of

Getting to Smart Growth. Since then, I’ve given them to local

municipal officials and developers. Everyone likes the book and

I’ve run out of copies. It’s a great publication.”

Steve Davis, Canizaro Cawthon Davis, 

Jackson, Mississippi 

Praise for Volume I of Getting to Smart Growth: 

100 Policies for Implementation:
Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the efforts of the writing and research team that put

this publication together: Trent Frazier, Kevin Nelson, Lisa Nisenson, Mary Kay

Santore, Lee Sobel, Eric Sprague, and Tim Torma of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), and Dan Emerine, Eric Feldman, Amy Jiron, and Jennifer

Walker of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). Without

their efforts and teamwork, this primer would not exist. In particular, Mary Kay

Santore of EPA and Dan Emerine and Nadejda Mishkovsky of ICMA played a critical role in reviewing text, coordinating the process and bringing the document to

publication. Assistance was also provided by Laurence Aurbach, John Bailey, Charlie

Bartsch, Noreen Beatley, Kathy Blaha, Kendra Briechle, Heather Deutsch, Paul

Drake, Robert Freeman, DeLania Hardy, Marla Hollander, Stephanie Jennings, Leah

Kalinosky, Dennis Leach, Deron Lovaas, Aarin Lutzenhiser, Barbara McMillen,

Stuart Meck, Joe Molinaro, Steve Mouzon, Lisa Mueller, Nathan Norris, Lucy

Rowland, Victor Rubin, Joe Schilling, Julia Seward, Ellen Shubart, Stuart Sirota,

Benjamin Starrett, Megan Sussman, Peter Swift, Harriet Tregoning, Bill Wilkinson,

Jessica Wilkinson, and Paul Zykofsky—all of whom provided excellent insight and

review of the document as it was being developed. The many photographers and

other colleagues credited throughout this primer provided valuable assistance by

allowing the use of their images. Special thanks to Geoff Anderson, Lynn Desautels,

and other staff members of EPA’s Development, Community, and Environment

Division for their role in providing comments, materials, and other assistance. We

would also like to thank David Biggs, Mary Matheny, Jim McElfish, Johanna Nyden,

Kenrick Pierre, Robert Puentes,Tom Steinbach, and the many others who submitted

ideas for inclusion in this volume. Finally, Christian Kohler provided valuable assistance with proofreading and editing the text. Design and layout by Carol Earnest.

This document was developed under a cooperative agreement with the U.S. EPA’s

Development, Community and Environment Division.

Cover Credit

Dover, Kohl & Partners; James Dougherty, Illustrator. Renderings from “Connecting

Johnson City: A Master Plan for Johnson City.”

About the Smart Growth Network

The Smart Growth Network is a network of private sector, public sector, and nongovernmental partner organizations seeking to create smart growth in neighborhoods, communities, and regions across the United States. Partners in the network

include the American Farmland Trust, American Planning Association, Association of

Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Center for Neighborhood Technology, Congress

for the New Urbanism, Conservation Fund, Environmental Law Institute, George

Washington University Law School’s Center for Sustainability and Regional Growth,

Growth Management Leadership Alliance, Institute of Transportation Engineers,

International City/County Management Association, Local Government Commission,

Local Initiatives Support Corporation, National Association of Counties/United

States Conference of Mayors Joint Center for Sustainable Communities, State of

Maryland, National Association of Counties, National Association of Local

Government Environmental Professionals, National Association of Realtors,

National Multi-Housing Council, National Neighborhood Coalition, National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration, National Trust for Historic Preservation, National

Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Northeast-Midwest

Institute, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, Scenic America, Smart Growth America,

Surface Transportation Policy Project, Sustainable Communities Network, Trust for

Public Land, Urban Land Institute, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Join the Smart Growth Network!

The Smart Growth Network also includes hundreds of individual members from

across the United States and around the world. SGN members are planners, developers, elected and appointed officials, and community activists committed to making

smart growth a reality. Individual memberships in the Smart Growth Network are

$49 for the first year, and $29 for renewals. Membership information, along with

publications and other information about smart growth, can be found online at

www.smartgrowth.org.

For more information, send an e-mail to smartgrowth@icma.org or call 

202/962-3623.

ISBN: 0-87326-139-9

©International City/County Management Association
INTRODUCTION

There are some key differences between the two volumes. First

and foremost, Getting to Smart Growth II presents all new policies.

And, while it contains many actions for the public sector, it

expands on our previous effort by also highlighting steps that the

private sector can take to promote more livable communities.

This volume is also more specific than the first. It discusses individual programs (occasionally specific applications of broader

ideas presented in the previous work) and emphasizes case studies

to show where the various policies, programs, and projects have

been successfully implemented. In a few cases you will find policies that are totally new and await their first application. Finally,

in addition to “Practice Tips,” we have included “Finance Tips”

that illustrate important financial aspects of getting smart growth

projects on the ground. These tips address an important fact

about development: what gets financed is what gets built.

Smart growth projects are now being financed in record numbers.

Momentum for implementing smart growth continues to mount

in both the public and private sectors. The Congress for the New

Urbanism (CNU) estimates that between 2001 and 2002, the

number of smart growth developments increased by 26 percent,

and that by December 2002, 472 smart growth developments had

been completed. In another study, the CNU estimated that up to

one-third of the demand for new housing over the next couple of

decades is likely to be for dense, walkable communities.

When we published the first volume of Getting to Smart Growth:

100 Policies for Implementation, we knew that there was an audience

for the practical information it contained. We were surprised to

learn just how big that audience was. Between January 2002, when

the publication was released, and September 2003, roughly 20,000

hardcopies were distributed and over 68,000 copies were downloaded. Requests for Getting to Smart Growth came from developers, architects, planners and planning commissions, city and

county managers, mayors and council members, citizens, and realtors, as well people and groups less familiar with the movement

toward smarter growth. The document has served as the organizing principle for conferences, has been required reading for academic coursework, has served as the basis of surveys, and has

informed city councils, planning committees, and smart growth

commissions across the country and around the world. It is even

being translated into Spanish. Clearly, there is a demand for information that connects smart growth ideas with specific action. 

Getting to Smart Growth II picks up where the first volume left off.

Like its predecessor, this volume shows that a wide variety of

smart growth tools, policies, and approaches are available to create

more livable communities. Each community has its own unique set

of challenges, and smart growth demands a flexible response.

Volumes I and II offer a menu of options that can be mixed and

matched to fit local circumstances, local visions, and local values. 

Getting to Smart Growth II:

100 MORE POLICIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

On the public side of the ledger, smart growth has received significant support. Seventeen governors issued 19 executive orders on

planning, smart growth, and related topics between 1999 and 2001,

as compared with 12 orders issued during the previous eight years

combined. In the elections of November 2000, there were 553 state

and local ballot measures related to some aspect of growth that

went before voters: 78.2 percent of open-space measures passed,

71.4 percent of economic-development measures passed, and 74.7

percent of infrastructure measures were approved.

These positive trends reflect the belief that communities can do

more to ensure that development improves their economy, community, and environment. They are questioning the wisdom of

abandoning existing shopping centers only to have to later rebuild

them on areas that used to be farmland. They are unhappy with

development decisions that limit their choices and mobility by

forcing them to drive long distances in heavy traffic. They are

frustrated with current regulations that limit housing choices and

drive up housing costs. They are increasingly aware of the tax and

local budget impacts of neglecting existing infrastructure and

rebuilding it on the community fringe. Typically, these issues have

been debated in the form of growth-as-usual versus no-growth

debates. The problem is that neither option solves the problems.

The popularity of smart growth stems in large part from its focus

on a more pragmatic question: “How and where should we

grow?” By asking this question, communities have been able to

capture the benefits of growth and to avoid many of its pitfalls.

Current budget problems and competitions between localities for

tax revenue have only made the question of how and where to

grow more important. Budget shortfalls mean communities must

get the most from every dollar invested while maximizing their

economic development potential. Many communities that identify opportunities to reduce traffic, preserve open space, and make

better use of their tax dollars also find that outdated regulations,

perverse subsidies, and arduous approval processes prohibit the

market from delivering. Fortunately, the same dynamics that

make smart growth popular also provide the political will to

remove barriers and let the market function.

Smart growth has been characterized in many ways, and some initiatives—such as directing growth away from certain areas without identifying parcels appropriate for development, high-density

projects without a mix of uses, and large-scale revitalization without affordable housing—have been incorrectly characterized as

smart growth in order to capitalize on the popularity of the term.

Such initiatives lack the combination of the many smart growth

principles (see box) that create synergies and generate benefits.

The most successful communities take a multipronged approach

that incorporates many of smart growth’s principles, and by doing

so, they achieve many of smart growth’s goals. New development

adds value to the existing community. Localities get the most

from their investments. Residents have a variety of transportation

choices—walking, biking, transit, and driving—to get to convenient amenities (e.g., schools, shops, restaurants, and libraries) and

jobs located close to their homes. A mix of housing and neighborhood types meets the needs of couples, singles, families, and seniors, thus fulfilling the many American Dreams that exist in the

market place. 

One of the best indicators of the effectiveness of Volume I was the

number of e-mails and letters we received in praise of how the

book led to some meaningful action or policy change. We look

forward to hearing more stories and feedback from users of

Volume II. Please feel free to drop us an e-mail at

smartgrowth@icma.org. We hope you enjoy this volume and that

it helps to create a better future in your community and communities across America.

ii

SMART GROWTH

PRINCIPLES

1.

Mix land uses

2.

Take advantage of

compact building design

3.

Create a range of housing

opportunities and choices

4.

Create walkable communities

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

10.

Encourage community and

stakeholder collaboration

in development decisions
iii

Table of Contents

I. MIX LAND USES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMPACT BUILDING DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

III. CREATE A RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHOICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

IV. CREATE WALKABLE COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

V. FOSTER DISTINCTIVE, ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

VI. PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, FARMLAND, NATURAL BEAUTY, AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS . . . . . . . . . . 51

VII. STRENGTHEN AND DIRECT DEVELOPMENT TOWARD EXISTING COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

VIII. PROVIDE A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

IX. MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS PREDICTABLE, FAIR, AND COST EFFECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

X. ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATION IN DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

APPENDIX A: MATRIX—100 POLICIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

APPENDIX B: DIRECTORY OF SMART GROWTH FUNDERS AND LENDING INSTITUTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

LIST OF ACRONYMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Chapter 1 

Mix Land Uses

Avariety of uses—residential, commercial,

open space, and institutional—is a critical

component of any vibrant community. It provides opportunity and convenience, and accommodates many household types and needs. A

mixed-use community enables a resident to

walk from the house to the corner store to pick

up some bread, grab a cup of coffee, or rent a

movie, all while heading home from a play date

with Fido in the dog park. This ease of walking

to several distinct yet interrelated businesses

and public places is the norm in a mixed-use

community.

One need not look far for examples. According

to a recent study by the Philadelphia Daily News,

Philadelphia’s Center City boasts the largest

number of downtown residents in the United

States who walk to work—38,000 people, comprising more than 50 percent of residents in

Photo: EPA—Development, Community, and Environment Division
PRACTICE TIP:

Town center districts are flexible

zoning tools used in a variety of

communities. In older, established

towns and cities, town center districts are adopted to create

incentives for developing or redeveloping in the downtown of a

central business district. In newer,

greenfield sites they are used to

create a unique, mixed-use, and

denser pattern of development

than the rest of the community.

Both applications seek to create

mixed-use communities through

zoning controls. Examples of

municipalities that have successfully adopted town center districts include Cary, North

Carolina; Washington Township,

New Jersey; Anchorage, Alaska;

and Swansea, Illinois.

consistently surpass standard suburban real estate products in

office and retail lease rates, house sales and apartment rents, retail

sales and sales tax revenues, hotel room and occupancy rates, and

onsite and adjacent property values.2 In addition, small cities, suburbs, and other established communities are looking to retrofit key

parts of their communities. They have been strategically directing

investment to create mixed-use downtowns where none existed

before, and to create intensely developed mixed-use centers

focused around transit.

The nationwide trend of developing mixed land use projects is evident in suburban communities and revitalized urban neighborhoods. All interested parties, including real estate developers,

community residents, and government agencies, can benefit from

the attributes of a built environment that provides more options

for living, shopping, and working than conventional projects. The

previous volume of Getting to Smart Growth placed an emphasis on

removing the barriers to mixed use, especially zoning regulations,

so that residential, commercial, and institutional buildings could

legally exist within a single community. Adjusting zoning, however, is only one step to creating mixed-use opportunities and connecting a diversity of uses. Beyond changing the codes, adjusting

ordinances, and providing financial incentives, community objectives to achieve a mix of land uses must be reflected in their comprehensive plans and in neighborhood-led planning activities. 

1.

Adopt comprehensive plans and sub-area plans that encourage

a mix of land uses.

Local governments generally update comprehensive plans every 5

to 10 years, depending on available resources and political will.

These plans spell out the locality’s goals for its future developthis area.1 The study reveals that people who cannot afford or do

not want to own cars are among the biggest beneficiaries of mixed

land use developments. The proximity of houses to businesses

enables them to accomplish life’s tasks without the added transportation costs. The elderly can also benefit from mixed land uses.

Many seniors who live in communities with segregated uses

depend on taxis, buses, or neighbors and family members to drive

them to their daily routines. Those residing in mixed-use communities, on the other hand, can walk to grocery stores, beauty

salons, doctors, and social engagements, allowing them to lead

healthier and more independent lives.

It is in cities that people most commonly encounter a variety of

uses in their individual neighborhoods. However, the benefits of

mixed land uses can be achieved in a variety of settings, including

downtowns, city neighborhoods, suburban enclaves, and rural

towns. Suburban mixed-use communities like Reston Town

Center in Virginia and Miami Lakes Town Center in Florida have

become increasingly popular over the past decade and are one of

the hottest real estate trends in the United States today. During

the past 20 years, more than 30 mixed-use town centers have been

completed or are now being built across the country. Town centers

2 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Photo: Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects

This loft-style development in

Denver incorporates retail and 

residential uses.
MIX LAND USES 3

mercial, and office land uses along an arterial corridor. A graphic

and accompanying text designates the development of certain

parcels with multiple land uses. This is different from standard

plans that generically show an area of land to be mixed use without listing techniques by which the mix will be accomplished.

Without this attention to detail, “mixed use” areas may end up

being areas where uses are adjacent to one another but are not

mixed from a functional or design perspective. 

2.

Use enhanced zoning techniques to achieve a mix of land uses.

Many cities base planning and development decisions on outdated

and antiquated zoning ordinances. Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee,

and Rochester have all taken necessary steps to revise their ineffective zoning ordinances. For Chicago and New York, a wholesale zoning update has been necessary to respond to contemporary

development patterns. Due to the time and financial constraints of

conducting a comprehensive zoning update, many communities

revise their zoning ordinances in a piecemeal fashion to accommodate site-specific developments or nonconforming uses. No matter

the method, zoning ordinance updates now assume a variety of

approaches. One example is the form-based code, a regulatory

mechanism that sets requirements for building design and orientation without being constrained by listing permitted and nonpermitted uses. Form-based coding is founded on the idea that a

community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most

intrinsic and enduring characteristic. Arlington County, Virginia,

has adopted a form-based code for redeveloping its Columbia Pike

Corridor. Information regarding this code is available at

http://www.co.arlington.va.us.

The city of Largo, Florida, modified its zoning with performance

measures. It includes a provision in its ordinance to provide zonment. Including an explicit goal to increase the mix of uses in specific areas can be an important step in making it happen.

Comprehensive plans may inform infrastructure decisions and

economic development strategies that can be used to promote

mixed uses. Developers can see more clearly the type of development the locality is looking for and what is likely to be approved.

And, where conflicts arise, the comprehensive plan is often needed

to justify a local government’s action—such as a rezoning

approval, requirements for housing in a downtown area, and other

similar decisions.

In addition to updating comprehensive plans more regularly, many

municipalities use smaller sub-area plans to specify development

aimed at achieving a mix of uses. For example, Houston, Texas, a

city with no formal zoning codes, applies performance standards

to ensure that incompatible uses do not exist in mixed land use

areas.3 The city applies these performance standards in smaller

area plans. Each plan describes the types of uses that can be

located on a designated block or neighborhood, and these uses are

permitted based on guidelines that specify an intended outcome,

such as ensuring that residences are within walking distance to

retail establishments or that office workers can access lunch

options without having to use their cars.

In other communities, such as Grand Rapids, Michigan, area-specific plans are used to designate land uses on a neighborhood level.

Area-specific plans assign appropriate land uses, promote compatibility between new development and the existing neighborhood,

and use standards and design guidelines to make sure that development is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The area-specific plan can be used not only to designate the mixture of land

uses, but to also provide a framework for how those land uses will

be developed. For example, the North East Beltline Joint

Development Plan describes the relationship of residential, com-
4 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

ing relief if certain aspects of

development have been established and satisfied. For example,

reduced yard setbacks can result

in increased building heights.

The net result is that the developers are able to build denser

mixed land-use projects. Largo’s

goal is to calibrate zoning packages to allow and even encourage

this type of development.4

Another example of innovative

zoning is the addition of a Town

Center Zoning District. This

type of zoning helps a city or

town revitalize a commercial district or downtown, and works best as a component of a conventional zoning ordinance. For example, the Village of Winfield,

Illinois, has successfully designed and adopted a Town Center

District that provides flexibility to encourage multiple land uses on

a single parcel (or a consolidated group of parcels). Winfield’s

Town Center District Plan includes design guidelines and bulk

regulations aimed at creating an area that is pedestrian friendly

and accommodates a mix of uses where businesses and housing

intersect. This type of zoning district allows various uses and density types to exist in the same district without requiring variances

from a typically homogenous zoning district. 

3.

Provide regional planning grants for projects that produce

mixed land use.

Regional planning grants can play a significant role in shaping the

redevelopment of communities to include a mix of land uses. Since

most suburban growth and development occurs as single uses on

large acreage, localities may have little capacity to consider new

forms of growth. Grants can provide the resources local governments need to innovate. Once they gain experience with these

types of projects and see examples on the ground, subsequent

projects become easier.

One example of this incentive is a program administered by the

Metropolitan Council of Minneapolis-St. Paul called Livable

Communities Opportunity Grants. The program provides grants

to municipalities throughout the metropolitan region. Awards

range from $10,000 to $75,000 to support smart growth initiatives

before actual development. Funds support cleaning up polluted

land for redevelopment, marketing land for affordable housing, or

incorporating transportation options for developments. The redevelopment of a 40-plus-acre site for West Panhandle

Redevelopment in the community of Crystal promotes housing

choice, more efficient land use, transit opportunities, natural environment enhancements, and increased livability. Other projects

include redeveloping the Little Asia strip in Brooklyn Center into

a mixed-use retail and residential development with an Asian

theme and architecture, as well as creating the Spruce Street

Development Plan for a 450-acre mixed-use site in the city of

Farmington’s historic downtown. 

Integrating design and development specifications, such as providing shops within walking distance of homes and offices, into the

grant-making process achieves a particular benefit for the commuPRACTICE TIP:

The American Planning Association (APA) developed the Growing Smart

Legislative Guidebook of model codes and statutes for planning that can

help in developing mixed-use communities. The guidebook provides examples of how communities can update their codes, ordinances, and planning

techniques to encourage and facilitate land use development that is consistent with smart growth principles. A significant part of the document covers issues related to state land use controls and the enforcement of land

development regulations.The guidebook also provides examples for coordinating and streamlining their codes that can directly result in preserving

open space, increasing investment in existing communities, and enhancing

the feasibility of mixed land uses. For more information, contact the

American Planning Association at www.planning.org.
5

5.

Accommodate the reuse of closed, decommissioned, or obsolete

institutional uses.

Vast, outdated institutional structures, such as airports, military

bases, and hospitals are being transformed into hubs of multiuse

activities. These include Stapleton Airport in Denver, the Joliet

Arsenal outside Chicago, and areas of the Baltimore Inner Harbor. 

For such development projects to occur, governments need to be

creative in changing zoning and development guidelines. In several cases, the projects are of such a large size and complexity that

a new zoning district must be crafted to promote varied uses

within the derelict airport or the decommissioned military base.

For example, the introduction of new zoning districts has allowed

the redevelopment of Stapleton, Denver’s longtime airport, into a

mixed-use district that includes pedestrian-friendly residences,

stores, and commercial uses. Other projects may require special

planning efforts to coordinate the reuse of environmentally sensitive lands or to establish a marketing plan to redevelop the site. 

No matter the project, coordination among essential decision

makers, regulators, and landowners is critical. As these sites are

redeveloped, their mixture of uses should be integrated into the

existing fabric of the community and its environment. New streets

for the Stapleton project are designed to connect and align with

streets of existing neighborhoods. Buildings, especially those along

streets that make up the boundaries of the project, reflect and

complement the style and design features of those of nearby communities. This ensures continuity between existing structures and

the Stapleton project. 

nity. The incentive of a grant program enables regional planning

authorities to single out best practices and entice other communities to propose projects that meet the grant parameters. Even if

not all projects are funded, the process may still inspire communities to undertake mixed-use developments.

4.

Encourage the redevelopment of single uses into 

mixed-use developments.

Single-use districts are a hallmark of current development patterns—so much so that the names themselves tell the story: strip

centers, office parks, industrial parks, entertainment districts,

malls. Creating a mix of uses in these single-use areas is a fundamental challenge and tremendous opportunity. It is an opportunity

because of the potential to make better use of infrastructure,

increase the value of the investments, and provide more convenience for the users of these developments; a challenge because

retrofitting is difficult. However, communities, seeing the potential benefits, are taking on the challenge. 

The state of New Jersey’s Office of Smart Growth seeks to address

this issue through its Local Assistance Planning Grants as part of

its State Development and Redevelopment Plan. These new

grants provide design and technical guidance to local governments

interested in transforming single-purpose sites into mixed-use

centers. The state provides design guidelines and technical assistance to local governments that are interested in this type of

development.5 The borough of Woodridge, New Jersey, received a

planning grant to redevelop a 150-acre site containing the 36-acre

Curtiss-Wright military aircraft warehouse into a mixed-use traditional neighborhood. The state has also established a Governors

Award Program to highlight successful examples. 

MIX LAND USES

PRACTICE TIP:

In light of economic hardships,

cities have been looking to create

new opportunities in old and traditional land use patterns. For

instance, the city of San Francisco

has recently converted vacant

downtown office space—a legacy

of the recent dot.com bust—into

housing. Some critics state that

the $250 per square foot cost of

conversion will result in unaffordable housing. Yet, proponents note

that an increase in the housing

supply will provide more options

for downtown residents and

attract much-needed services,

such as grocery stores, to the

downtown area. In Cambridge,

Massachusetts, industrial buildings are being adapted into housing and retail uses. Modern production processes and pollution

control technologies have made it

easier for some industrial and residential uses to coexist.

Cambridge is exploring opportunities to mix land uses within existing industrially zoned districts.
6 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

deferred impact fees to finance the development.7 Redevelopment

agencies have been utilized throughout California to lead development efforts and have been critical in realizing the potential for

financing mixed-use projects.

Elgin, Illinois, a city of 93,000 located approximately 35 miles

northwest of Chicago, is undergoing a major rebirth and revitalization by focusing its efforts on reinvigorating its downtown

through city-sponsored financial incentives. Though not run

through a redevelopment agency, the city offered tax abatement,

façade improvement programs, and dollars for site improvements,

such as upgrading roads and utilities. Since 1999, the city completed 10 separate rehabilitation projects downtown, bringing residents back to this once empty part of the city. These projects

mostly focused on updating and modernizing underused commercial properties for residential and retail development.

7.

Locate neighborhood stores in residential areas.

Conventional subdivisions often designed with cul-de-sacs and

winding roads force residents to drive into their development and

then drive out again whenever they need to shop for even the

smallest item, such as a carton of milk. Developers and local governments are starting to look at alternatives that include convenience shopping within walking distance of residential development. This arrangement can cut traffic and air pollution, make the

neighborhood more convenient, and give neighbors another

opportunity to meet one another. 

Most residential subdivisions include a public passive open space

or a community gathering area such as a plaza or a landscaped

entrance feature. Other developments may include tennis courts

or a pool. With a little bit of planning and some creative redesign,

6.

Provide incentives for ground-floor retail and upper-level 

residential uses in existing and future development.

Urban, suburban, and rural communities are realizing the benefits

of mixing land uses, especially for those developments that combine residential and commercial uses in proximity to each other.

This form of mixed-use development can be particularly attractive

because it can provide more sales opportunities for local merchants, convenience for residents, and nearby housing for retail

workers. While this type of development is common in some parts

of the country, other communities are now just discovering its

benefits. The city of Phoenix hopes to create dynamic commercial

and mixed-use corridors and communities, and is currently looking at such examples in the Los Angeles area as models to increase

the density and mixture of uses for some of its prominent thoroughfares.6

Some localities believe that this type of development is such a vital

component to their quality of life and

economic competitiveness that they have

taken steps to spur its creation. The city

of Santa Cruz, an affluent community of

over 50,000 on California’s Monterrey

Bay, has established a redevelopment

agency to catalyze development in its

commercial districts. One recently completed project, 1010 Pacific Apartments,

includes 70 market-rate housing units, 40

affordable units, nearly 10,000 square feet

of first-floor retail, and 100 bicycle

spaces. The project used tax increment

financing, low-income tax credits, and

Mixing uses can be facilitated when

buildings can be used as easily for

residences as they can for businesses. Upper Marlboro, Maryland.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
MIX LAND USES 7

any of these public spaces can be reconfigured to include a small

convenience store. 

The new town of Columbia, Maryland, features a version of this

idea. Columbia was developed as a series of villages that included

residences and a centrally located village square containing commercial, office, and public uses such as a school or swimming pool.

Each resident lives no more than a mile from the village center

and the amenities it provides; residents can walk, bike, or drive to

village center services.

Localities can actively encourage convenience retail or restaurants

by asking developers to include land in their plans for such amenities. However, the viability of small stores and restaurants is predicated in large part by having an adequate number of residences

within proximity. Therefore, when localities seek to encourage such

retail development they should be prepared to discuss density

bonuses that will make those ventures more likely to succeed. 

8.

Use floating zones to plan for certain types of 

undetermined uses.

Flexibility in development decision is critical for local government

agencies as well as for private developers in encouraging innovative development. Innovative zoning tools such as planned unit

developments (PUDs) and overlay districts have resulted in a multitude of creative mixed-use projects. These tools are based on

providing flexibility within a designated zoning district. The district may be a PUD, which allows for a mix of uses and relaxation

of setback and bulk regulations while emphasizing design control

and preferences, or it may be an overlay zone, which supplements

an existing zoning district.8 Alternatively, the community may

indicate “floating” zones, which are zones that are defined in the

zoning ordinance, but not used for a particular location until

enacted for a specific project. Floating zones are “dropped” onto a

zoning map to provide a community with greater flexibility in

locating particular uses. In most cases, municipalities apply floating zones when the anticipated development is not yet known.

These unspecified areas are a way to designate a discrete area

without having to rezone an entire district or series of parcels.

A vibrant Philadelphia neighborhood that includes residences

above an Italian market.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
8 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Ames, Iowa; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Montgomery County,

Maryland, use floating zones to designate parcels for mixed-use

development. Ames uses three types of floating zones: village residential, suburban residential, and residential low density. Each of

these floating zones provides for additional development within a

larger district that allows greater densities or the location of retail

and affordable housing nearby or, in some cases, on the same zoning lot. The possibilities for using floating zones are nearly as endless as the possible locations for applying floating zones. 

9.

Organize a variety of land uses vertically and horizontally.

Sometimes the most effective mix of uses occurs within the same

building. Noise can be a problem for downtown housing, particularly at the street level. Some localities that have sought to

increase housing in their downtown areas have encouraged streetlevel retail, second- and third-story offices, and residential development on top levels. 

In September 2002, Washington, D.C., introduced an initiative to

encourage developers to build vertically rather than horizontally.9

The city’s Department of Planning drafted a publication called

Trans-Formation: Recreating Transit-Oriented Neighborhood Centers

in Washington, DC: A Design Handbook for Neighborhood Residents.

The purpose of the publication was to illustrate ways to encourage

transit-oriented development through design innovation and

enhancements. Vertical development, which in many communities

consists of at least six stories, can be achieved by incorporating

additional permitted uses in zoning districts or by providing density bonuses for developments that include a mixture of uses on

one site. A jurisdiction can even offer financial incentives when a

development includes one or more elements of a mixed-use development. These incentives might be tax abatements or increased

dollars for façade improvement programs or site preparation and

review proceedings. 

10.

Develop mixed-use university districts.

Colleges and universities are important landmarks and institutions

in the cities and towns in which they are located. They are major

employers and often house hundreds of student residents on-site.

Campuses are also part of a larger, existing neighborhood. More

and more universities are developing new master plans that call

for creating more attractive transitions into neighborhoods as well

as providing the student body and nearby residents with mixeduse amenities such as restaurants and retail. 

Schools can take several approaches to incorporating a greater

mix of uses into their campuses. In some instances, the school can

use its real estate holdings to create mixed use centers. At the

University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, the school has constructed Sansom Common, a 305,000-square-foot mixed-use

development, which is part of the 2001 Campus Development

Plan. The project is anchored by a university bookstore and also

houses the Inn at Penn, an adjoining 259-room hotel, and 54,000

square feet of additional retail and restaurants. Graduate student

housing will also be constructed as part of the project.10 

Universities can also help to ensure that the new dormitories they

build serve a number of functions. At Oregon’s Portland State

University, a $49 million student housing and mixed-use facility is

under construction. The project will include one floor each of

retail and classroom space, and eight floors of student housing

with 384 studio apartments.11 
MIXED LAND USE

Finally, universities can work with local planners to support the

goals of the community at large. In 1994, plagued by blight and

safety concerns, the Ohio State University in Columbus established a University Area Improvement Task Force composed of

faculty, staff and students, university community organizations,

and the city of Columbus. The task force established a new nonprofit redevelopment corporation, Campus Partners, to prepare a

revitalization plan for the University District. In 1996, after

working with representatives of community organizations, local

government officials, and university officials, Campus Partners

released the University Neighborhoods Revitalization Plan. The

University, in partnership with the local government, developed

250 recommendations—including improving student rental housing, increasing the level of homeownership in the University

District, and revitalizing the retail market serving these neighborhoods. A major project, the South Campus Gateway, is expected

to open in the summer of 2005. According to Campus Partners,

the South Campus Gateway may be the largest mixed-use urban

redevelopment project ever attempted in central Ohio.12 

1 Mark Alan Hughes, “Philadelphia’s Valuable Foot Fetish,” Philadelphia

Daily News, May 20, 2003.

2 Charles Lockwood, “Raising the Bar: Town Centers are Outperforming

Traditional Suburban Real Estate Products,” Urban Land Magazine,

February 2003.

3 For details, see City of Houston, Department of Planning and

Development, http://www.ci.houston.tx.us/planning.htm.

4 For details, see City of Largo, Community Development Department,

http://www.largo.com/index.cfm?action=dept&drill=community.

5 Paul Drake, New Jersey State Office of Smart Growth, phone 

conversation, August 18, 2003.

6 Jon Talton, “How Commercial Arteries in L.A. Stay Healthy,” 

Arizona Republic, April 29, 2003.

7 Eugene Arner, City of Santa Cruz, Department of Planning and

Community Development, e-mail, May 1, 2003.

8 Bob Kindred, City of Ames, Iowa, Department of Community

Development, phone conversation, May 1, 2003.

9 Washington, D.C., Department of Planning:

http://www.planning.dc.gov/documents/pdf/Trans-Principle5.pdf.

10 See http://www.elkus-manfredi.com/sansom.html.

11 Sheila Bacon. “Portland State University’s Broadway Housing Creative

Financing Speeds up Process.” September 2003. http://northwest.

construction.com/features/archive/0309_Feature1.asp

12 Campus Partners, The Ohio State University. See http://www.osu.edu/

org/osucp/index.html.

PRACTICE TIP:

Beyond the National Trust for

Historic Preservation’s Main

Street Program, many local, state,

and federal programs exist to direct

funds for downtown and commercial district revitalization. Many

villages and cities, such as Santa

Cruz, California, have a

Redevelopment Authority or a

Redevelopment Division of the

Department of Community or

Economic Development. Statewide

programs, funding through a

Department of Commerce and/or

Community Affairs can leverage

additional grants that are available. These funds can support programs that ensure combined retail

and residential land uses.

9 In the new urbanist development of

Kentlands in Gaithersburg,

Maryland, residents can choose to

reside in live-work units.

Photo: Heather Deutsch

Chapter 2 

Take Advantage of Compact

Building Design

Although compact building design and density are often met with stiff resistance in

communities, changes in consumer preference

and demographics are creating a demand for

quality higher-density housing products and

neighborhoods. Recent surveys suggest that

Americans prefer a wider array of housing

choices, including condominiums, duplexes or

townhomes, and single-family detached housing, than conventionally believed. Similarly,

Americans prefer a diversity of neighborhood

types, in particular those with shops and services within walking distance.1 According to

another recent survey, 63 percent of Americans

would like to walk to stores and other places.2

The same survey also found that 54 percent of

Americans believed that there were too few

shops or restaurants within walking distance of

their homes. 

Photo: Congress for the New Urbanism
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Higher-density development is a key

element to creating walkable communities and providing more transportation options. From a retail

standpoint, more density means

more customers. A neighborhood

that includes more compact development can support more stores and

restaurants within its boundaries.

Density also fosters more transportation choices. More riders in the

same area mean that bus or rail service becomes more viable and convenient. Whereas a low-density

development may only justify a stop

on the development’s edge, a development with more people may

attract a central transit stop within a short walking distance for all

residents.3 The transportation choices created by density offer

people the freedom to select from a variety of transportation

modes—walking, bicycling, mass transit, automobile transit—to

complete their daily routines, such as commuting to work or

school, running errands, and taking their kids to daycare. 

Higher-density development can also contribute to a wider range

of housing choices. Higher-density projects can reduce per-unit

construction costs, allowing developers more flexibility to

respond to the market and, thus, offer a range of housing types to

a variety of consumers. Young singles can find smaller units with

convenient access to entertainment, families can seek large yards

and multiple bedrooms, and retirees who are tired of maintenance

can downsize their yards in favor of housing with more amenities

and services. Providing these options in the same neighborhood

enables residents to change housing arrangements without having

to move from the community. For households with limited

income, higher densities mean more housing choices at different

price points. 

Consumer desires for convenient neighborhoods with many

amenities, as well as public sector efforts to address traffic and use

public resources efficiently, are creating increased interest in

more compact development. The following policies and strategies

offer a number of ways to support compact building design within

a community.

1.

Organize a compact development endorsement program.

Many community members voice displeasure with development

plans during the development process. However, with the emergence of smart growth, many organizations, from affordable

housing advocates to environmental groups, are now supporting

quality-development proposals. The Greenbelt Alliance supports

quality projects through their Compact Development

Endorsement Program. The alliance hopes that 

the program will make the development process easier for 

smart growth developers and thereby promote future development initiatives.

The alliance endorses and supports residential, mixed-use, and

commercial developments that are pedestrian-oriented and transitaccessible, use land efficiently, and provide affordable housing in

the Bay Area.4 Alliance staff members use a variety of criteria to

review potential endorsements. These criteria include housing

affordability, pedestrian friendliness, and project density. After

meeting the criteria, a developer receives a letter of support and

active endorsement at public hearings and other forums. 

12

Compact development helps create

communities with a variety of uses

and transportation options.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMPACT BUILDING DESIGN

In 2001, the alliance lent its support to the Gateway Senior

Project in Santa Clara, a 42-unit apartment development.

Located in the city center, the project will encourage walking and

the use of transit. A train depot located five blocks away, near

shops and services, is also on the property. One hundred percent

of the development will comprise housing units built according to

a compact design concept. In addition, the architectural motif of

the project will be modeled after the 1930s Mission Revival style

so that the housing units will fit in with existing neighborhood

structures.5

2.

Adopt a cottage housing development zoning ordinance.

In communities across the country, rising demand accompanied by

changing demographics is making the cost of housing too expensive for many citizens. As a result, officials are exploring various

remedies to encourage development of additional housing without

sacrificing the character of their respective communities. Many

such communities are rediscovering the virtues of cottage housing

and are implementing new ordinances called cottage housing

development (CHD) zoning ordinances, which are designed to

facilitate development of these time-honored housing types. 

Cottage houses are single-family detached units, usually less than

1,000 square feet in size, that incorporate many of the amenities

associated with conventional single-family detached housing.

Because of the style and size of cottage houses, developers can

cluster cottage housing onto smaller parcels of land without sacrificing the feel and character of detached housing. A CHD ordinance facilitates development of these units by designating specific zones in the community where housing may be constructed

within a specified range of footprints. Within such zones, community officials may work with developers to establish applicable

densities and design amenities. 

The community of Langley, Washington, a small town situated

on Whidbey Island in Puget Sound, is already reaping the benefits of its recently implemented CHD ordinance. In the early

1990s, development pressures stemming from the nearby Seattle

region offered new vitality to the Langley community but threatened to overwhelm its rural character. Consequently, in 1995,

community officials adopted the region’s first CHD ordinance to

cluster additional housing comfortably into higher-density CHDs

built according to the style of the surrounding village. Under the

ordinance, housing built in the district could be clustered up to

12 units an acre and constructed on footprints between 650 and

975 square feet. Each unit would be fully detached and could

incorporate many of the amenities found in larger housing types.

To the surprise of some, local developers quickly capitalized on

the new ordinance to create some of the most appealing housing

in the area. The Third Street Cottages, the first development to

emerge under the ordinance, quickly garnered admiration from

local villagers and prospective purchasers alike. The units provide

a variety of new housing to local buyers while consuming only a

third of the land required under the original ordinances.

Third Street Cottages in Langley, 13

Washington, provide affordable

housing opportunities and use

only a third of the land required

under the original ordinances.

Photo: Ross Chapin
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

3.

Use compact development coupled with onsite best management practices to improve environmental outcomes.

Compact development offers environmental benefits. By supporting greater transportation choices, higher densities can contribute

to improvements in regional air quality. The U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) projected that Atlantic Station, a

higher-density infill development in midtown Atlanta, will generate 33 percent fewer emissions in comparison to the same development built at lower densities and located in a greenfield.6

Research also suggests that higher-density development can play

an integral role in protecting water resources. Specifically, by

consuming less land, higher-density development leaves lands free

that would otherwise be developed, and such land can continue to

perform its ecological functions. 

A 1995 study by the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League

examined the water-quality impacts of two development alternatives for the 583-acre Belle Hall site in Mount Pleasant, South

Carolina. The results concluded that the conventional low-density scenario consumed eight times more open space and generated 43 percent more runoff, four times more sediment, almost

four times more nitrogen, and three times more phosphorous

than the more compact, town-centered scenario.7

In some cases, however, compact development can create “hot

spots” of pollution or adversely impact critical environmental

areas if located in the wrong place. Best management practices

(BMPs) can mitigate developmental impacts on adjacent environmental resources and reduce pollution originating from the developed area. There are many BMPs available to communities,

including buffer zones, narrower residential streets, and tree

planting, and when incorporated into compactly designed areas,

these can address any increased pollution.8

4.

Use traditional neighborhood design.

Mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly, compact developments are not

new phenomena. These “traditional neighborhood design”

(TND) developments were the predominant urban form in the

U.S. up to and through World War II.9 The original TND developments are still found in urban and rural locations such as

Seattle, Washington, and Danville, Indiana, respectively. The

Capitol Hill neighborhood in Seattle offers residents the opportunity to walk to Volunteer Park or grab a cup of coffee along

15th Street; the town square in Danville provides neighborhood

meeting places, such as the public library and Mayberry Café. 

However, from the mid-1940s to today, the predominant development pattern across the country has been single-use, low-density, and auto-dependent designs characterized by pods of commercial, retail, office, and residential development. This new

form of development has replaced lively neighborhoods with

stretches of residential, commercial, and retail pockets. Within

these contexts, compact development can impose unacceptable

costs because the design, infrastructure, mix of uses, transportation options, and other features that make density (and, more

broadly, development) work well are not in place. Retrofitting

existing neighborhoods and creating new ones with TND can

help re-create functioning neighborhoods that benefit the economy, community, and environment. 

TND involves developing neighborhoods that have definite centers and edges, a mix of destinations within a short walk, a diversity of housing types and styles, and access to public transit.10 

PRACTICE TIP:

Conservation subdivisions have

become a popular tool to preserve

open space. However, they should be

used with care as they may lead to

further separation of uses and

increased dependence on automobiles and, in some cases, may spur

leap-frog development, which further consumes land for development. In the context of a larger

vision for the community, conservation subdivisions can play a vital

role, but as a piecemeal tool or

solution they should be avoided.

14
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMPACT BUILDING DESIGN

5.

Use compact design to create more secure neighborhoods.

Well-designed compact developments can foster the sense of

safety and security that every person desires in their community.

By incorporating front porches, attractive common open space,

and narrow streets with sidewalks into new or existing developments, the community promotes safety and security by means of

its own activity. This type of crime prevention is referred to as

“eyes on the street,” and is based on the idea that an active community with people using the streets and watching the streets

from their homes or yards can deter street crime. Jane Jacobs, the

noted observer of neighborhood function, pointed out the crimeprevention benefits of density and compact building design in the

early 1960s. She described the virtues of compact design as a

means for providing a critical mass of individuals to use the

streets, parks, and public spaces of the city.11 

Throughout the country, neighborhood planners and community

activists have begun to promote crime prevention through environmental design, or CPTED, in order to engage residents in

endeavors to create safer communities. The establishment of

defensible space, a key component of CPTED, occurs when community residents take an interest in their surroundings and adopt

community policing initiatives. In an existing neighborhood, this

means enacting traffic-calming measures and providing or

enhancing semiprivate courtyards to encourage residents to

gather and, subsequently, monitor their surroundings. In proposed neighborhoods, streets should be narrow to encourage contact among neighbors. CPTED uses design to minimize the

opportunities for crimes to be committed.

Police stations around the U.S. are employing CPTED strategies

to prevent crime. In the city of Norfolk, Virginia, 144 neighborhoods encompassing 40,000 residents are part of the police

department’s “Block Security” program. This program incorporates the principles of CPTED and also includes site-plan reviews

that focus on security issues, neighborhood watch programs, and

a citizen security council. In an analysis of crime data, Norfolk

found a 30 percent decrease in the burglary rate for areas in the

block security program as compared with other areas in the city.12

6.

Subdivide vacant warehouse space into residential units.

One of the biggest trends from the second half of the 1990s and

to the 2000s is the conversion of abandoned and vacant warehouses into compact residential units. Most cities that experienced warehouse conversions during this time are located east of

15

Denver, Colorado’s Lower Downtown neighborhood has been successfully renovated

from an underused warehouse district into a

vibrant, compact destination.

Photo: Eric Sprague 
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

the Mississippi River (e.g., Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Chicago),

but some jurisdictions, like Minneapolis and Denver, have also

seen entire neighborhoods revitalize when derelict warehouses

were reused as housing. 

Most of these warehouse districts, like Chicago’s Near West Side

and Denver’s LoDo, or Lower Downtown, neighborhoods, have

capitalized on their proximity to downtown by welcoming a wealth

of new residents and businesses to these long-neglected sectors of

the city. The city benefits by being able to put these structures

back on the tax rolls, and with the extra income, residents, who get

to live in a hip new area, enjoy maintained and improved municipal services. The other positive enhancement for the city is that

the infrastructure for these buildings already exists. There can be

lower outlay for streets and utilities in lieu of establishing new

buildable sites. A majority of all warehouse conversions results in

higher densities of residential living than the development of single family homes or many other types of projects.

Minneapolis’s Mill District, which in the 1920s and 1930s was the

largest flour mill district in the country and was home to companies like Gold Medal and Pillsbury, now hosts many young singles, restaurants, and retail establishments. In the Mill District,

which also includes the historic North Star Woolen Mill and the

Crosby Washburn Mill Complex, city officials are using tax increment financing and other public funds to pay for public redevelopment activity. Since most warehouse conversions are complicated ventures that might include brownfields or other remediation issues, it is important to develop a master plan for these

properties and seek public-private partnerships to ensure that

market demands and public requirements are satisfied.13 

7.

Ensure that big box stores locating in existing urban centers

are appropriately scaled and designed.

Big box stores, which typically range in size from 90,000 to

250,000 square feet, are popular shopping destinations for

American consumers. Large inventories and low prices tend to

drive the demand. Between 2001 and 2002, sales at warehouse

clubs and superstores increased by $27.5 billion, or 16.7 percent.14 Between 1970 and 1998, retail space per capita increased

from 32 to 38 square feet per person—a gain of 20 percent over

the past 27 years—as a result of the growth of superstores and

power centers.15 Architecturally, these stores are typically characterized by windowless, standardized, one-story buildings with an

ample supply of parking—hence the moniker “big box.” 

While it is crucial for communities to thoroughly review the pros

and cons of big box retailing, including the impacts it may have

on small businesses, it is also clear that many consumers have an

appetite for it. While most big box establishments are located in

the urban fringe, residents in urban areas are increasingly looking

for compact versions of these stores. In addition, by encouraging

these national chains to locate in older retail districts rather than

suburban greenfields, it is possible to draw more customers to

downtown areas. 

To make Main Street big box retail successful, communities need

to ensure that new stores complement the existing retail district.

There are design techniques that local governments may want 

to consider. 

• Prohibit blank walls. Allow no uninterrupted length of any

facade in excess of 100 horizontal feet. If a facade is greater

than 100 feet in length, it must incorporate recesses and projecPRACTICE TIP:

For case studies on big boxes in

urban areas, see Better Models for

Superstores by Constance Beaumont.

Available from the National Trust for

Historic Preservation.

16
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMPACT BUILDING DESIGN

tions along at least 20 percent of the length of the facade.

Windows, awnings, and arcades must total at least 60 percent of

the facade length abutting a public street. 

• All facades of a building that are visible from adjoining properties or public streets should contribute to the pleasing scale 

features of the building and encourage community integration

by featuring characteristics similar to a front facade. 

• Do not locate more than 50 percent of the off-street parking

area between the front facade of the building and the primary

abutting street.16

8.

Create compact office parks and corporate campuses.

In many areas, office parks are isolated pods of commercial or

industrial development surrounded by grass or trees and parking

lots that are linked to other office buildings by a winding service

road. Disconnected from any community fabric, these places

require that workers drive to get lunch or run errands. According

to a 2000 survey issued by the Brookings Institution, the suburban

share of office space grew from 26 percent in 1979 to 42 percent in

1999. The survey also found that by 1999, 37 percent of all office

space was found in highly dispersed, “edgeless” locations.17

Separating office activity from residences and commercial areas

can create a jobs-housing imbalance. The consequences of this

are readily apparent: commuters spend hours in traffic to reach

isolated office destinations, arterial roadways are jammed at

lunchtime, and workers have no nearby amenities. To deal with

these issues and to create a more inviting environment for

employers and employees, companies around the country are

looking at more integrated approaches to office parks. They are

connecting job centers to nearby train stations with feeder buses.

Office parks are becoming places where people can live and shop

as well as work. Rather than building detached, single story office

buildings, companies are seeing the advantage of locating in more

compact areas that support a range of amenities.

In Plano, Texas, a city 20 miles from Dallas, Legacy Town Center

has been constructed as an alternative to the traditional office

park. More than 32,000 people work in the area, and it is the

home to the headquarters of Electronic Data Systems, Frito Lay,

and AT&T Wireless. 

Recognizing that employees are tired of long commutes and are

looking for a better quality of life, the businesses of Legacy and

the city of Plano embarked on the development of a town center

in the middle of the existing business park. The pedestrian-oriented Town Center sits on 155 acres within the 2,660-acre office

park and has over 600 units of housing, a child development center, a 57,000-square-foot fitness center, and shopping, restaurants,

and other amenities. To accommodate the variety of uses, the city

of Plano created a “mixed-use Town Center” zoning type for the

area. Under this designation, special attention is paid to set-backs,

green space, and architectural design. 

Major players in the real estate market are also beginning to recognize the importance of more compact, amenity-filled office

locations. In August 2003, Boston Properties, a large real estate

investment trust, spent a record $205 million for two fully leased

office buildings in Virginia’s Reston Town Center, a compact suburban community outside of Washington, D.C. A senior vice

president of the firm remarked in the Washington Post, “If you

look at Northern Virginia overall, there’s a lot of space available.

But if you look at Reston Town Center and within a quarter mile

of it, you have a vacancy rate of less than 5 percent,” compared

17
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

with 23 percent overall in the Reston-Herndon high-tech

enclave. “Even in a soft market, there’s a flight to quality. Tenants

want to be as close as possible to amenities, the restaurants and

retail.”18 Compact development makes these amenities possible.

9.

Strategically reduce or remove minimum lot size requirements.

When faced with traffic, loss of open space, or rising demands on

public services from new development, many communities seek to

fix the problem by increasing minimum lot sizes. The thinking is

straightforward. Larger lots mean more expensive houses and

thus more tax revenues. Spreading out development will spread

out traffic and reduce congestion. Put the same house on a larger

piece of land and leave more open space. There is an intuitive

appeal to this thinking. However, many communities have had

counterintuitive results, with larger lot sizes sometimes exacerbating the very problems they were meant to avoid.

Here’s why. While government requirements for large lots do

drive up housing costs, the extra tax revenues may be offset by

other factors. For instance, longer distances between houses mean

extra infrastructure and higher capital costs—not only within the

development (where the developer likely pays), but also between

developments that the local government generally pays for. In

addition, larger lots mean a development consumes more land

than it would otherwise. When this land is farmland or other

“working land,” the locality loses a valuable taxpayer. Unlike

houses, working lands almost always pay more in taxes than they

demand in services. Finally, zoning exclusively for large lots and

houses may mean that more incoming households will be families

with school-age children. Schools are often the largest cost for

local government. Zoning that provides for families, retirees,

young couples just starting off, and singles can diversify the

household base and thereby reduce school costs.

In response, localities are now looking at the advantages that can

come with strategic reductions, or in certain parts of a community, with the removal of minimum lot sizes. Like large lot zoning

under 1 unit per 20 acres, zoning for smaller lots does not directly

preserve open space. However, unlike larger lot zoning, smaller

lot sizes can actually reduce market pressure on undeveloped

land, providing communities with time to preserve important

open space. In some cases communities have linked these two

ideas, providing more building opportunities in one area in

exchange for preservation in another through tradable development rights. For instance, in Montgomery County, Maryland,

land in the more rural upcounty area was downzoned from 1 unit

per 5 acres to 1 unit per 25 acres, and landowners were allowed to

sell the difference in development rights to downcounty areas

where greater density was allowed.

10.

Manage the transition between higher- and lower-density

neighborhoods.

Providing a variety of housing, neighborhood, and transportation

choices is one of smart growth’s principal goals. To provide

choices, a variety of development—including main streets with

shops and townhouses, business centers with offices and apartments, and single-family neighborhoods with yards—is needed. 

Arlington County, Virginia, is an example of a community that

has been able to successfully integrate higher- and lower-density

development. Arlington’s many neighborhood types meet a variety of living preferences and economic means. Residents can

choose to live in any number of amenity-rich neighborhoods that

18
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMPACT BUILDING DESIGN

are a short walk or bike from shopping, parks, schools, and

restaurants and a subway ride or drive from work and regional

destinations. 

Arlington County has concentrated higher-density development

on less than 7 percent of its land along its two rail transit corridors. This small portion of land area generates 70 percent of the

county tax base. Integrating density in a concentrated area allows

the county to offer urban living to some and protect suburban living for others while increasing property values and maintaining

community character throughout.

Arlington has used a variety of techniques to manage the transitions between areas of lower density and areas of higher density,

including:

• Establishing bull’s-eye zoning around transit stations. This concentrates the highest density around areas with the greatest

transportation choices and gradually reduces density as you

move away from the stations. In single-family neighborhoods,

residents know that higher densities will be located elsewhere

and that there will be developments of middling densities to

transition from one neighborhood type to another. (For more

information on bull’s-eye zoning, see Principle 10, Policy 8.)

• Stepping down building heights. Transitions between high and

low density are mediated by middling densities. Midrange density can take different forms, such as large buildings surrounded

by parking or smaller buildings that make up more coherent

neighborhoods. Arlington specifies that as you move from

high-density to low-density areas, building heights should be

reduced. Thus, low-rise buildings achieve moderate densities,

provide sound barriers between busy centers and quiet neighborhoods, and create a consistent visual progression.

• Citizen participation in the planning process. Arlington’s residents are very engaged in the planning process and have a good

understanding of the development plan and goals. Their participation creates support for higher-density development in the

transit corridor, and their input helps to ensure that new development adds value to the existing neighborhood.

These are just a few of the techniques applied in Arlington. Many

other techniques (such as strategic location of parks, matching

building types across streets, stepping buildings back when they

reach their upper stories, and matching local architectural styles)

also provide effective means of accommodating higher density.

Achieving higher-density development in some parts of a community is a key to providing amenities, housing choices, economic

opportunities, and transportation options. Residents in Arlington

have willingly accepted higher density because they have worked

closely with local officials, because the development rules are

clear, and, ultimately, because new development has improved the

neighborhood and quality of life. 

1 Dowell Myers and Elizabeth Gearin, “Current Preference and Future

Demand for Denser Residential Environments,” Housing Policy Debate, 12

(2001): 637-639.

2 Belden Russonello and Stewart, Americans’ Attitudes Toward Walking and

Creating Better Walking Communities (Washington, D.C.: Belden

Russonello and Stewart, 2003), 4-5.

3 John Holtzclaw, Sierra Club Home Page, June 1994, http://www.sierraclub.

org/sprawl/articles/characteristics.asp (accessed 28 April 2003).

4 http://www.greenbelt.org/whatwedo/prog_cdt_index.html

5 http://www.greenbelt.org/whatwedo/prog_cdt_projectsummary.html

6 US Environmental Protection Agency, “Transportation and

Environmental Analysis of the Atlantic Steel Development Project,” in

Our Built and Natural Environments (Washington, D.C.: EPA Publication

#231-R-01-002, 2001): 47. 

19
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

7 South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, EPA, NOAA, SC

Department of Health and Environment, Town of Mount Pleasant, The

Belle Hall Study: Sprawl vs. Traditional Town: Environmental Implications

(South Miami, FL: Dover, Kohl, and Partners, 1995). 

8 The Center for Watershed Protection’s Web site (http://www.cwp.org)

provides many resources on developing BMPs, and EPA’s stormwater

office has developed a National Menu of Best Management Practices for

Storm Water Phase II, which is online at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/

stormwater/menuofbmps/menu.cfm.

9 Andres Duany, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, and Jeff Speck, Suburban Nation

(New York: North Point Press, 2000).

10 Congress for New Urbanism. Online Tour,

http://www.cnu.org/about/index.cfm?formaction=tour&CFID=3676916&

CFTOKEN=15865508. For more information on developing communities with TND principles, visit the Congress for New Urbanism’s Web site

at www.cnu.org.

11 Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York:

Vintage, 1961).

12 Norfolk Police Department Web site: http://www.norfolk.va.us/police/

block.html (accessed August 25, 2003).

13 For more information about the redevelopment of Mill District in

Minneapolis, see http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2003-

meetings/20030516/docs/06-West-Side-Milling-Dist.

14 Dougal M. Casey, 2002 U.S. Retail Sales, Mall Sales, and Department Store

Sales Review (New York: International Council of Shopping Centers, April

2003).

15 James Valente and Leslie Oringer, “Retail’s Evolving Footprint,” Urban

Land. July 1998. 30-35.

16 Chris Duerksen and Robert Blanchard, “Belling the Box: Planning for

Large Scale Retail Stores.” Proceedings of the 1998 National Planning

Conference. http://www.asu.edu/caed/proceedings98/Duerk/duerk.html.

17 Robert Lang, “Office Sprawl: The Evolving Geography of Business”

(Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. October 2000).

18 Kenneth Bredemeier, “Record $205 Million Paid for Office Buildings.”

Washington Post, August 11, 2003. 

20
Chapter 3

Create a Range of Housing

Opportunities and Choices

Acritical part of implementing smart

growth is ensuring that a range of housing options is available for varying income levels and demographic groups. As individuals pass

through various stages of their lives, their housing needs often change. Communities with

smart growth policies meet these challenges by

ensuring that a broad range of housing types is

available for a variety of income levels. While

many empty-nesters may be ready to scale

down to smaller homes, others may want to

remain in their homes as they age. Some individuals may want to forgo the demands of a

house and its inherent responsibilities for the

ease of apartment or condo living. Some community residents may lack the economic

resources to purchase or maintain a home or

even to find viable rental housing in their comPhoto: Peter Calthorpe Associates
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

munity. One of the primary goals of smart growth is to provide

enough variety in housing types and price ranges to accommodate

a vast array of needs and tastes.

The supply of affordable housing is a concern in communities

across the country. Throughout the late 1990s and into the new

millennium, annual housing prices steadily increased 7 or 8 percent, with some markets like the Silicon Valley area of California

showing 50-75 percent increases over the past five years.1

Housing price increases are caused by a number of interacting

factors, including the supply and demand for housing, the price of

inputs such as labor, materials and land, and the amount of choice

in the housing market. Researchers have concluded that both

conventional land use regulations (e.g., density limits, minimum

square footage requirements, and bans against accessory dwelling

units such as attached housing or granny flats) and growth management policies can affect the affordability of housing. Yet, as

researchers also note, smart growth policies can help improve the

supply and the location of affordable housing as well as improve

the community by providing mixed-use developments that offer

nearby services and transportation choices. Such improvements,

in turn, make the neighborhood more desirable and help maintain housing values.2

Cities are recognizing that they need to house residents of all

incomes. A recent poll conducted by the Chicago Tribune shows

that six of ten Chicago metropolitan residents believe more

affordable housing is needed in their local community, and twothirds support building it in their own areas.3 Public- and privatesector policies and actions can enhance the availability of housing

choice within a neighborhood and region.

1.

Establish an employer-assisted housing program.

An adequate supply of affordable housing can be a major asset for

regional economic development and a key to attracting talented

employees. Where localities do not have housing choices for individuals who work in entry-level jobs, employees must either

choose between a long commute or moving to another community with more affordable housing. Many employers are recognizing they can help improve this situation for their employees.

In 2000, the Greater Minnesota Housing Fund (GMHF), created

by the Twin Cities’ Metropolitan Council, developed and implemented several innovative models to better match housing supply

with housing demand. The fund works with employers to match

down-payment assistance, leverage housing-development financing, and provide technical assistance for communities interested

in expanding their affordable housing.4 These programs serve a

wide range of housing needs, from assisting a potential homeowner with closing costs to directing investment funds into communities that are designated for redevelopment.

Successful employer-assisted housing strategies serve two essential purposes: they increase the available housing stock in a community and help employees to buy existing housing. Because of

these strategies, a family can build equity and enjoy the security

that a home brings. In addition, the employer benefits from

increased employee loyalty, savings derived from the decreased

need to train new employees, savings because wages do not need

to be increased to retain and attract employees, reduced worker

commuting times, and overall civic pride. 

PRACTICE TIP:

The Fannie Mae Foundation’s

KnowledgePlex Web site is a comprehensive, interactive resource for

learning more about affordable

housing and community development. It offers updates on housing

legislation, innovations from around

the country, and articles that

address up-to-date topics and concerns. For more information, see

http://knowledgeplex.org.

22

A range of housing styles and types

on a Seattle,Washington, block.

Photo: Affordable Housing Design Advisor
CREATE A RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHOICES

2.

Streamline the development review process when units include

affordable housing.

Affordable housing production is often hampered by cost and

time delays due to regulations and administrative oversight.

These regulations determine the use of funding mechanisms and

the design and construction of housing units. The land acquisition process can also delay housing projects. Making the development review process as fast and simple as possible is one way to

encourage construction of more affordable housing.

Municipalities can ease the process by granting comprehensive

zoning approval if a certain percentage of housing units in a

development is affordable to lower-income households. Ensuring

a high-quality product and engaging stakeholders to determine

the rules for granting streamlined permits are key to the success

of this strategy. 

In summer 2003, the Maryland-National Capital Park and

Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) announced the initiation of

an expedited development approval process for affordable housing projects in Montgomery County, Maryland, called the “green

tape process for affordable housing.”5 The Montgomery County

Planning Board has often expressed concern about the critical

need for more housing units that are affordable to citizens whose

incomes prevent them from purchasing market-rate housing. 

Under the “Green Tape” program, the M-NCPPC will coordinate

and streamline plan reviews to ensure an expedited approval

process for affordable housing projects. Eligible projects include

residential or mixed-use development that designates at least 20

percent of the total number of housing units to persons or families

with incomes at or below the income level for moderately priced

dwelling units as defined in the

Montgomery County Code. Changes to

be included in the Green Tape process are: 

• Modified application forms for subdivisions, project plans, and site plans to

identify affordable housing projects 

• An expedited review process for 

applications

• Improved communications between the

reviewing agencies

• Creation of a geographic information

system map overlay of Green Tape

applications for easy identification of

these projects

• Expedited construction permits and utilities permits processing.6

3.

Create a regional program to encourage all communities to

include a fair share of affordable and moderate-range housing.

In many regions, the housing stock does not include a balance of

housing types and prices across all communities. The efforts of

one city to provide housing for lower-income residents may not

address overall demand if neighboring communities do not make

similar efforts. The need for a wide distribution of affordable

housing within a region also relates to reducing commuting

times and congestion, balancing jobs and housing, and mitigating

concentrations of poverty. Planners around the country are trying several approaches to ensure that all communities throughout a metropolitan area achieve an adequate range of housing

types and include a fair share of affordable and moderate-range

23

Detached single-family homes in

Grayslake,Illinois,feature garage

alleys and face a large neighborhood park.

Photo: Kevin Nelson 
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

housing. The following illustrates two examples of unique fairshare partnerships.

All cities and counties in California are required by state law to

have a general plan that includes a “housing element.” Plans must

be certified by the state, which can require changes if they don’t

comply with state mandates. Once adopted, the general plan has

the force of law: a local government cannot legally act inconsistently with its general plan. While the law does not require cities

and counties to build affordable housing themselves, their housing elements must: 

• Establish housing programs and policies that encourage 

affordable housing for people of all incomes and those with

special needs

• Demonstrate that they have enough land zoned for 

multifamily housing to build all of the homes needed for 

lower-income families

• Reduce obstacles to housing development

• Describe how they will use available funding for 

affordable housing.7

Portland, Oregon, has adopted a Regional Affordable Housing

Strategy (RAHS) that calls for local governments within the

region to adopt “voluntary affordable housing production goals.”

The strategy also requires communities to submit a progress

report that indicates the status of comprehensive plan amendments, land use tools, and supply of affordable housing. The specific actions recommended in the RAHS focus on cost reduction,

land use and regulatory issues, and the distribution of regional

funds; all actions are voluntary. Because the Portland Metro

Council accepted the RAHS in June of 2000, information regarding the effectiveness and outcomes of the approach were not

available at the time of printing.8 

4.

Use transportation funds as an incentive to provide housing

near transit.

Many growing urban areas are experiencing both an acute shortage of housing and severe traffic-congestion issues. Local governments seeking sales tax revenues tend to zone and create incentives

for office space and retail development. Conversely, they may

engage in efforts intended to keep out low-cost housing to avoid

the associated fiscal burdens. This can create an imbalance

between the number of jobs in a jurisdiction and the number of

residential units, which, in turn, can worsen traffic congestion during peak hours and lead to lifeless commercial areas after hours. 

Officials in San Mateo County, California, knew their housing

shortage was creating a jobs-housing imbalance and contributing

to higher housing costs. The resulting long commutes increased

traffic congestion and worsened air quality. To address this problem, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo

County (C/CAG) sponsored a countywide transit-oriented development (TOD) incentive program. C/CAG can allocate up to 10

percent of its state transportation improvement program funds as

an incentive for local land use authorities to develop housing near

transit stations.

Under the program, a jurisdiction receives funds based on the

number of bedrooms built near rail transit. Typically, eligible

projects receive up to $2,000 per bedroom. To be eligible for the

program, housing must be within one-third of a mile of a rail

transit station, and density must be at least 40 units per acre.

Funds can be used to support transportation improvements either

PRACTICE TIP:

The American Planning Association’s new report Regional

Approaches to Affordable Housing

examines the results achieved to

date in the regions or areas of the

country where equity in housing

opportunity is a planning priority.

For more information, visit

www.planning.org.

24
CREATE A RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHOICES

on or off site, as determined by the land use agency. In addition to

direct transportation improvements, the program permits some

general improvements, such as landscaping, lighting, sidewalks,

plazas, and recreational projects.

For the first cycle, October 1999 to September 2001, C/CAG

programmed $2.3 million to its TOD incentive program to support development of 1,282 bedrooms in five projects. The second

cycle, February 2002 to February 2004, has programmed over

$2.9 million for 10 projects to facilitate the creation of 2,407 bedrooms. San Mateo’s success has inspired other communities to

implement similar programs with their transportation funds.

Through these local incentive-based programs, regional governments are addressing housing shortages while decreasing traffic

congestion and maximizing ridership on their transit systems.

5.

Use housing to engender 24-hour cities in revitalization plans.

Downtown revitalization projects often focus on creating new

regional attractions, such as a stadium, an aquarium, a convention

center, or a shopping plaza. There is often a belief that these

kinds of projects will bring more money into the city by attracting

large crowds and spin-off businesses like hotels and restaurants.

Another common practice aimed at maximizing the government’s

return on tax dollars is to overbuild office space because workers

require fewer services than residences. Revitalization efforts

focused only on these kinds of developments, however, create

downtowns where the activity occurs only during the business day

or during special events on the weekends. 

In contrast, revitalization projects that incorporate housing as a

critical component re-energize entire neighborhoods. With residents living in a place around the clock, a new market is created

for nightlife, services, and shopping. Housing creates the energy

for a 24-hour city. Round-the-clock cities are consistently recommended as sound places for real estate investment. They are

desirable locations for developers and real estate investors due to

their higher barriers to entry, geographic amenities, transportation and technology infrastructure, and cultural, entertainment,

and retail opportunities. Within suburban locations, dense centers

are beginning to evolve into 24-hour markets where residents can

work, shop, dine, and entertain in a given neighborhood. In their

annual publication Emerging Trends in Real Estate,

PricewaterhouseCoopers and LendLease have favorably rated 24-

hour markets for the past decade. As cities realize the potential of

their downtown areas, many are trying to encourage more housing there while maintaining affordable housing stock.

Washington, D.C., for example, is reinventing itself as a 24-hour

destination. Like many urban centers, D.C. had been losing population for decades. By the mid-1990s its downtown was hollowed

out, and after 5:00 p.m. it was largely abandoned. Then, changes

in government, a thriving economy, regional traffic congestion,

and demographic changes combined to make the city a desirable

place to live. The District made the most of its popularity by

encouraging residential housing development in downtown commercial areas. Between 2000 and 2002, the Office of Planning and

Economic Development reported that 3,144 residential units

were completed, while 5,725 were under construction and 10,194

were in predevelopment stages. Many of these units went into

traditional commercial and office locations. Residential development in these areas has increased its safety after work hours and

made it more profitable for businesses to stay open later.

To increase city revenues and enliven the downtown, D.C.’s

mayor has adopted a goal of increasing the residential population

25
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

by 100,000 persons by 2010. To meet that goal, the District is

embarking on a new marketing campaign—“city living, dc style!”

Targeting commuters, current renters, young professionals, and

empty nesters, the city living campaign will highlight the opportunities that accompany downtown living: housing for all

incomes, recreation for all ages, and entertainment for every taste. 

6.

Integrate smart growth and housing programs.

The most successful way of ensuring that a community supports a

diversity of housing types and price ranges is to create a comprehensive housing program reflective of smart growth principles. 

A typical place to start is to identify housing-opportunity zones

within the general or comprehensive plan that are also consistent

with smart growth goals. For instance, a diverse range of housing

should be located near transit and/or job centers. This in turn

creates not only more housing opportunities, but also transportation choice and more balanced regional growth. Yet, by itself, a

plan is not enough to guarantee the inclusion of affordable housing. Using incentives in zoning processes and fee structures, cities

and counties can more easily encourage developers to build

affordable units in designated smart growth areas.

Lack of affordable housing in California’s Silicon Valley has

forced low-income families to live far outside the center of the

region or in overcrowded conditions. In 2000, the average price

of a single-family home in Silicon Valley was $617,000, and in

April 2001, the median monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Santa Clara County was $1,800.9

In response to these concerns, San Jose’s city-planning staff conducted a “Housing Initiative Study” to examine market demand

and land supply for new housing in the Guadalupe light-rail transit corridor. Finding that the area could accommodate up to

10,000 new, compact units, the city updated its general plan to

allow substantially more housing along the transit line. 

As a result of this policy direction, 25 projects comprising 4,145

housing units have been built in existing transit corridors (both

bus and rail) with city assistance. To finance the affordable components of these projects, San Jose typically uses 20 percent of tax

increment financing receipts to fill the gap between conventional

financing and available supplements, such as low-income housing

tax credits and tax-exempt private activity bonds.10

Austin, Texas, developed a housing policy initiative called

SMART (safe, mixed income, accessible, reasonably-priced,11 and

transit-oriented), which requires that a certain number of units be

affordable for families who earn no more than 80 percent of

median family income. These units must be one-quarter mile or

less from existing or planned transit and meet additional criteria.

The program has a number of incentives to encourage developers

to build housing that meets the SMART specifications, including

a review process that is faster than traditional review times. Each

project is assigned a city staff person to help move the project

through review and inspection. 

SMART also waives fees associated with development, including

review and inspection, water and wastewater capital recovery, and

public-works construction inspection. The reduced fees operate

on a sliding scale, as shown on page 27.

Austin has certified over 6,000 new single-family or multifamily

housing units that meet SMART program specifications.12

As both the programs in San Jose and Austin demonstrate, a comprehensive approach is required to ensure that adequate supplies

26
of reasonably priced housing are available. Municipalities can

develop plans that target housing in specific smart growth areas

and then create flexibility and time savings in the zoning and

review processes. Financial incentives can also be introduced to

encourage developers to produce affordable units. 

7.

Adopt property tax exemption programs for mixed-income

developments and low-income homeowners.

Communities often struggle with finding ways to produce affordable housing. Some developers claim that land is too expensive or

that they cannot achieve a return on their investment if projects

include affordable units. Other barriers include design guidelines

and site-plan review costs. While many factors contribute to the

expense of supplying affordable housing, communities can use

tools that subsidize the cost to developers through tax exemptions. While providing such financial incentives for developers is

important, communities should be sure to craft their programs

around specific resident needs to achieve the best results. 

CREATE A RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHOICES

For example, Olympia, Washington, administers the Property

Tax Exemption Program for multifamily housing. The city offers

a 10-year property tax exemption as an incentive to developers

who incorporate multifamily housing within building projects

located in downtown Olympia and other eligible areas. To be eligible, projects must create at least four new or renovated multifamily units. Another stipulation is that the project cannot displace any existing residents.13 This program provides an incentive

to build multiple-family developments in areas that previously

had been devoid of housing for low-income residents and individuals living on fixed incomes. 

When creating property tax exempt programs of their own, communities should locate affordable housing in areas with significant

lifestyle amenities. A downtown setting typically provides access

to employment and shopping options while reducing the number

of vehicle trips. Program terms, such as the length of the tax

exemption and the amount of units per project, can vary.

8.

Develop smart growth funds to promote development in

underserved communities.

In many parts of the country, growth and development in lowincome neighborhoods is encouraged through grant programs,

incentives, and tax abatement packages. Without these incentives,

private investment would not likely occur in many places. The

use of incentive programs, especially with federal dollars, is not

new. However, setting aside funding for projects with a smart

growth tilt is an increasingly popular trend.

Establishing a smart growth fund is one of the most effective

means of ensuring that smart growth projects are developed and

funded in low-income communities. Either a public trust or a

PRACTICE TIP

PolicyLink, a nonprofit research

and communications organization,

offers the Equitable Development

Toolkit, an Internet-based community resource, to help community

leaders achieve equitable development: diverse, mixed-income neighborhoods that are strong, stable,

and welcoming to all. For more

information, see http://www.policy

link.org/EquitableDevelopment.

27

A builder provides

10 percent reasonably priced

housing units

25 percent reasonably priced

housing units

30 percent reasonably priced

housing units

75 percent reasonably priced

housing units

Reduced Fee Sliding Scale

City of Austin provides

20 percent fee waivers

40 percent fee waivers

50 percent fee waivers

100 percent fee waivers
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

consortium of private businesses can generate and manage this

fund. Each city then adopts a priority funding area, which indicates the location where monies will be dispersed (for more information on priority funding areas, see Principle 7, Policy 2).

Besides specifying the location for fund usage, the program

ensures that home development will be concentrated near existing

nodes of infrastructure and mass transit. 

The major benefit of this program is that it provides investment

for affordable housing in communities that typically see little or

no such investment. In several cases, the use of the smart growth

fund mandates that developments cannot displace neighborhood

residents. This requires that the fund manager work closely with

community residents and leaders to establish housing projects

that meet their needs. 

Because the fund provides the initial investment, each project

supplies a return back to the fund and its investors. The Bay Area

Smart Growth Fund, established in 2001, is a leading example of

targeting resources for the production of affordable housing. This

fund also finances market-rate housing and commercial properties. Companies throughout the Bay Area, including Wells Fargo

and Bank of America, have contributed. The fund was created by

the Bay Area Council to leverage financial resources to invest in

smart growth projects that take advantage of existing infrastructure and amenities, such as transit. A council of community-based

organizations and government representatives oversees the fund

to ensure that the investments made by the fund return tangible

benefits to the neighborhoods where the projects are developed.

As money is invested into projects, contributing companies

receive profits from successful projects. The Bay Area Council

hopes that the good faith and marketability of these housing projects will encourage investors to reinvest their profits in the fund,

thus creating a steady stream of financing for future endeavors. 

9.

Use different builders on contiguous blocks of land to ensure

a diversity of housing styles.

That homes appear to be indistinguishable from one another is a

common criticism of newer residential developments. When driving through such developments, the only variation one might discern among each house is the placement of a door, or the color of

the shutters, or the tone of the brick. This kind of homogeneity

occurs because builders are able to achieve economies of scale by

mass producing similar housing types and designs. In addition,

housing in many subdivisions is constructed with factory-built

components that may not allow for significant variation in design

details that can make a place unique. 

An innovative way to avoid the creation of cookie-cutter subdivisions is to have different builders construct homes on the same

block or, alternatively, to have different builders construct homes

on different blocks. The master developer for the massive

Stapleton project outside of Denver, Colorado, has hired 10 different homebuilders. Each builder is sold finished lots one block

at a time—a size large enough to ensure efficient home production. The same homebuilder is not sold contiguous blocks, and

because different companies construct different models with varying materials, styles, and colors, the result is a varied streetscape. 

Such an approach must be balanced with other considerations.

Clearly, there can be increased logistics involved when dealing

with more than one homebuilder. In addition, as the Stapleton

example suggests, production of multiple units in the same location can create economies of scale, reducing production costs and

thus the homebuyer’s cost. Also, developers will likely want to

provide some guidance on the style and feel of the neighborhood

they are creating; otherwise a number of different builders workPRACTICE TIP:

The Affordable Housing Design

Advisor is a tool produced by the

U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development. It helps the

developers, sponsors, and users of

affordable housing understand

what constitutes quality design,

why it is worth striving for, and how

to achieve it in their own projects.

For more information, see

http://www.designadvisor.org/.

28
CREATE A RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHOICES

ing on the same site may create an eclectic hodge-podge of house

designs. With these factors in mind, developers can successfully

employ a number of builders within their development to create a

full range of distinctive housing types. 

10.

Create a housing trust fund.

Housing trust funds are distinct funds established by legislation,

ordinance, or resolution to receive public revenues, which can

only be spent on housing. The key characteristic of a housing

trust fund is that it receives ongoing revenues from dedicated

sources of public funding, such as taxes, fees, or loan repayments.

Typically, legislation or an ordinance is passed that increases an

existing revenue source, such as a real estate transfer tax, with the

increase being committed to the housing trust fund. Housing

trust funds provide a more secure way to fund needed housing. In

addition, these funds enable middle-age residents to remain in

their neighborhoods and young adults to purchase homes in communities where their parents reside by financing a variety of

housing types and options. 

Today there are 280 housing trust funds throughout the country,

with an effort under way to establish a national housing trust

fund. Many trust funds include provisions requiring housing to

remain affordable over an extended timeframe and require leveraging local resources to maximize the potential benefit. 

On a statewide level, the Michigan Housing Trust Fund provided

146 loans to 68 organizations in 38 Michigan cities in 2002. These

loans totaled over $11 million and have leveraged more than $43

million in other funding, thereby assisting in the production of

over 1,200 affordable housing units.15 Nebraska’s Affordable

Housing Trust Fund distributes resources on a regional basis, with

outlays of $24 million over the last six years. While many trust

funds are established by states or large cities, counties such as

Santa Clara, California, administer a housing trust fund to provide

low-interest down payment/closing cost loans for first-time homebuyers, gap financing for affordable rental housing projects, and

funds to assist the homeless in attaining stable housing.

The Center for Community Change has published A Guide to

Developing a Housing Trust Fund. This resource provides tips on

how to manage the trust fund and use the resources to promote

affordable housing.16

1 David Leonhardt, “Homes Prices Still Rising, But More Slowly.” New York

Times, June 3, 2003.

2 C. Arthur Nelson et al., “The Link Between Growth Management and

Housing Affordability: The Academic Evidence.” Prepared for the

Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy

(Washington, D.C.: February 2002).

FINANCE TIP:

The Chicago Housing Authority

(CHA) has undertaken a unique

application of a Department of

Housing and Urban Development

(HUD) capital fund program to

complete a $291 million bond sale

to finance its senior and scattered

site property-rehabilitation program. This is the first tax-exempt

bond transaction to be secured

solely by capital fund program

grants. The CHA also recently

approved the issuance of an additional $20 million in bonds for the

redevelopment of its Henry Horner

Homes, an old public housing development on Chicago’s west side.

“CHA is very pleased with the continued high rating,” said CHA CEO

Terry Peterson. “This shows that

we are in a strong position to honor

our financial commitments and to

keep the promise we made to our

residents-to create better living

conditions in viable, healthy communities.” As the first public housing agency to utilize the HUD capital fund program in this way, CHA

was honored with the inaugural

“Deal of the Year” award from

Bond Buyer last year. HUD is now

in negotiations with the

Philadelphia Housing Authority to

leverage funds in the same manner.14

29

Senior housing in Durham, North

Carolina, converted from a mill.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

3 “Chicago Metropolitan Area Residents Support More Affordable

Housing,” Chicago Tribune, April 11, 2003.

4 For details, see Greater Minnesota Housing Fund, http://www.gmhf.com/.

5 This program is a variation of Montgomery County’s “Green Tape” review

team described in Volume I of Getting to Smart Growth.

6 Information on the “Green Tape” program can be found at

http://www.mc-mncppc.org/development/forms/green_tape.shtm.

7 This summary of California’s requirements is adapted from Shannon

Dodge, “Organizing with the State on Your Side,” Shelterforce Online, no.

121 (Jan/Feb 2002), http://www.nhi.org/online/issues.html. 

8 For more information on the RAHS, see http://www.metro-region.org/

article.cfm?ArticleID=417

9 Fannie Mae Foundation, Maxwell Awards of Excellence Program 2001-2002.

Affordable Housing Awards Finalist: Eden Housing, Inc., 26-29,

http://www.fanniemaefoundation.org/grants/ahd_eden.pdf.

10 For more information, consult http://www.ci.san-jose.ca.us/planning/

sjplan/.

11 Reasonably priced means that a percentage of the units in the development must be available to families who earn no more than 80 percent of

median family income for the city of Austin and who would spend no

more than 30 percent of their family income on housing. 

12 All figures are from http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/ahfc/smart.htm.

13 For details, see City of Olympia, Washington,

http://www.ci.olympia.wa.us.

14 Chicago Housing Authority, Office of Communications, personal 

communication, April 24, 2003.

15 Michigan Housing Trust Fund Web site, http://www.mhtf.org.

16 See http://www.communitychange.org for more information.

30
Chapter 4

Create Walkable Communities 

As mentioned in Chapter 2, recent surveys

of potential homebuyers consistently

reveal a significant desire for walkable communities. Many in the transportation, development, and planning fields have interpreted this

as a desire for recreational walking trails,

which, indeed, are popular amenities and selling points for some developments. However, as

a strategy for smart growth, simply establishing

walking trails falls far short of creating walkable

communities. The test for what constitutes a

walking community is based on one simple

question: is walking an attractive option for

accomplishing daily tasks? 

This simple question can lead communities in

entirely new directions, and achieving walkability can go a long way toward creating convenient, attractive, livable communities. To make

Photo: Congress for the New Urbanism
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

walking an attractive option, a number of factors must be

achieved: Destinations such as schools, corner stores, dry cleaners, and restaurants must be close by; neighborhoods must

include areas of more compact development to support such destinations; the walk must be safe from crime and traffic, which

means designing defensible space and promoting “eyes on the

street” (see Principle 2, Policy 5); road designs must accommodate pedestrian traffic and provide many direct routes to destinations (i.e., good street or trail connectivity); and, lastly, walkable

communities must be pleasant to walk in: street trees must provide shade and buffer auto traffic, and walkers should have interesting frontages to look at (not blank walls or large expanses of

surface parking). In short, if a community is successful in making

walking an attractive option for regular activities, it’s a good bet

that other parts of smart growth are in place, too.

There are numerous examples of jurisdictions around the world

that have successfully created walkable communities. Because

almost every trip requires some walking, we can all identify things

that make walking pleasant or unpleasant in our individual environments. This chapter lists some specific recommendations for

making neighborhoods more walkable.

1.

Develop a pedestrian master plan.

When provided with access to sidewalks, trails, or other walkable

features, residents are 28-55 percent more likely to choose walking over other modes of transportation.1 However, communities

are often designed without these basic elements and with little

focus on how the neighborhood can accommodate pedestrian

traffic. For most neighborhoods, public improvements that make

walking a more attractive option are possible, but there is often

no evaluation of these needs during the planning process. As a

result, other infrastructure improvements often do not address

walkability and, therefore, may perpetuate existing problems. A

pedestrian master plan can help focus time and attention on

improvements to pedestrian traffic. 

The pedestrian master plan should provide an approach to walkability that is consistent, yet allows flexibility, by adopting policies,

prioritizing current and future funding mechanisms, and furnishing design and implementation guidelines for projects. The plan

may include model codes and ordinances, technical guidelines,

estimated project costs, public transit and automobile traffic coordination, and land acquisition and growth issues. Special attention

should be given to highway and street design (including retrofitting existing infrastructure), the distribution of parks and recreational facilities, and school location (see Principle 2, Policy 6).

During the planning process, the entire community should be

involved, with a special emphasis on getting the participation of

senior citizens, children, people with disabilities, and people who

do not use cars. The pedestrian master plan should encourage

community feedback and review and inform adjacent local governments, developments, and neighborhoods of planned linkages

between pedestrian destinations. The State of Oregon

Transportation Planning Rule requires cities to adopt a pedestrian master plan to be included in the regional transportation

framework.2 The Portland Pedestrian Master Plan lays out action

items, improvement projects, and funding options to pedestrian

transportation over a 20-year timeframe.

32
CREATE WALKABLE COMMUNITIES 

2.

Design communities so that kids can walk to school.

According to a Centers for Disease Control HealthStyles survey,

less than 20 percent of kids currently walk to school.3 Students

living far away from school must be bused or driven to and from

school and extracurricular activities. Even students who live

within a short distance may opt not to walk if the route to school

is indirect, lacks sidewalks and other safety features, or because

parents perceive the route to school is unsafe (whether because of

the danger from traffic or because of fears about other safety

issues, such as crime). When walking is not an option and a parent or other adult is not available to drive, students who rely on

buses may have to sacrifice important after-school activities. 

Communities can make it easier to walk to and from school by

building or rehabilitating smaller schools one mile or less from

surrounding neighborhoods. Larger, centralized suburban schools

may offer larger facilities and more programs, but neighborhood

schools offer more efficient land use and closer walking proximity

for students, which ultimately translates to improved interaction

among students, schools, parents, and other citizens. The surrounding community can benefit from joint use of theaters, sports

fields, gyms, computer centers, libraries, and other resources during non-school hours. Smaller schools also can be located close to

facilities that provide daycare, sports, music, and other afterschool activities to supplement schools’ formal programs and provide additional convenience for parents and caregivers. 4

Moreover, as residents see their neighbors’ children walking to

school, they provide eyes on the street to enhance the safety of

those children.

Another way to provide walking opportunities for students is to

establish formal programs to improve safety for children who

choose to walk. Throughout the U.S., transportation, safety, and

school officials and parents are coordinating safer routes to school

by conducting walkability checks, retrofitting existing streets,

adding volunteer crossing guards, distributing safety manuals,

and/or organizing walking school buses.5 Examples of these programs include Chicago’s walking school bus, in which several 

parents escort a group of local students to school each morning,6

and California’s Walk-to-School Program Headquarters, which

promotes walking to school by posting information in 13 

different languages and highlighting methods for improving

walking safety.7

3.

Use trees and other green infrastructure to provide shelter,

beauty, urban heat reduction, and separation from 

automobile traffic.

All too often, the pedestrian environment can be inhospitable.

There may be no shade from the sun or visual relief from the

sameness of the buildings. When sidewalks are close to the street

edge, pedestrians may feel exposed to oncoming traffic. Planting

street trees and other green infrastructure can alleviate many of

these issues and make for a pleasant, comfortable, and safe walking experience. 

A good tree canopy creates a comfortable environment for pedestrians. In some cities, highly paved areas can be six to eight

degrees hotter than areas with greater vegetation. Vegetation also

absorbs carbon dioxide and filters air and pollutants, thus increasing air quality, lessening asthma-related health problems, and

reducing water treatment costs.9 

Trees and other vegetation can also act as a buffer between pedestrians and automobiles. To simultaneously create the shade

PRACTICE TIP:

The Centers for Disease Control’s

(CDC) Kids Walk-to-School

Program provides funding and

assistance to states for programs

such as International Walk to

School Day8 and the Walking

School Bus. The CDC online Guide

to Promote Walking to School at

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/

kidswalk/pdf/kidswalk.pdf provides

a step-by-step checklist, safety tips,

and funding recommendations to

assist communities in efficiently

implementing a kids-walk-to-school

program.

33
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

canopy and a buffer zone, many neighborhoods use a landscaped

strip between the sidewalk and the street. In the urban core, a

continuous landscaped strip may not be possible or desirable, but

street trees can still be placed in tree boxes or cut-outs. Trees are

not the only option for buffers. Planters made of concrete or

other materials and filled with greenery or flowering plants are

used on many streets. In addition, landscaped islands and medians

can create refuges for crossing pedestrians and can slow throughtraffic by narrowing the lanes of car travel.

To protect these investments over the long term, communities

should provide the policy framework and resources to properly

maintain vegetation. Many communities have enacted tree ordinances that cover issues such as the placement, care, and maintenance of trees (as well as the selection of appropriate species).

The International Society of Arboriculture has developed guidelines for developing and evaluating tree ordinances, which can be

found online at http://www.isa-arbor.com/tree-ord/. Some cities,

such as Cambridge, Massachusetts,10 have incorporated trees and

vegetated buffers into their pedestrian master plans (see Policy 1).

4.

Encourage safe pedestrian routes to

transit.

In terms of the level of development it

can support, the level of ridership it can

capture,11 or its effectiveness as a means

of reducing vehicle emissions,12 transit

works best when people can walk to it.

Yet in many places in the U.S., an overwhelming majority of riders reach transit

by car.

There are two main obstacles that prevent people from walking

to transit. The first is that street and sidewalk networks in transit

corridors and around bus stops and rail stations are often not

designed with pedestrians in mind. Many bus stops are located in

unsafe locations, such as at dangerous intersections, on highway

shoulders, or on streets with narrow or no sidewalks. A second

problem is that many transit stations are surrounded by large

parking lots. If the distance a typical person is willing to walk

from transit to a destination is a quarter-mile, and half of that distance is taken up by a parking lot, many walking trips have been

effectively deterred. Although “park-and-ride” commuter transit

stations can play a useful role in outlying areas, the parking

requirements and design standards are different in urban settings.

Communities may want to review their transit stations and determine whether (1) there are ways to make parking less of a barrier

to pedestrian access and (2) the land devoted to parking presents

an opportunity for development that will bring more potential

riders within walking distance of the station entrance. 

(See Principle 8, Policy 6.)

Many states, local governments, and transit agencies are now paying more attention to pedestrian safety and accessibility to transit.

Through a collaborative approach, these decision makers can

review the layout, location, lighting, and connectivity between

existing neighborhoods, new developments, and rail stations and

bus stops to increase safety, shelter, and convenience. New Jersey

Transit has received an $810,000 Transportation and Community

and System Preservation grant to upgrade pedestrian and bike

connections between commuter rail stations and the surrounding

townships. In the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan

Transportation Commission’s Housing Incentive Program has

provided funds to construct sidewalks and improve lighting in

housing developments within one-third of a mile of transit staPRACTICE TIP:

Trees Atlanta organizes urban tree

planting projects specifically to

improve the urban environment

with shading to reduce the urban

heat island effect. Guidelines for

tree ordinances and information

related to health, trees, and the

urban environment are available at

http://www.treesatlanta.org/

index.html.

34

8' 

min. 14' min.

The pedestrian master plan of

Cambridge, Massachusetts, shows

careful attention to the use of

street trees to create the pedestrian environment.

Courtesy: city of Cambridge
CREATE WALKABLE COMMUNITIES 

tions. North American communities can also look abroad for

examples. According to transit expert Robert Cervero, “the seamless interface of bicycle paths and pedestrian ways with major bus

and rail lines” is a major factor in the high transit-mode share of

many European and Latin American cities.13 Bogotá, Colombia,

and Copenhagen, Denmark, stand out as cities that make transit

easily accessible on foot or bike. Indeed, designers in Copenhagen

have apparently been able to extend the length that a typical

pedestrian is willing to walk to transit from an average of a quarter-mile to at least six-tenths of a mile.14

The city of Gresham, Oregon, created the “Ped-to-MAX” program to better integrate the light rail line, which bypassed downtown and two other destination areas, into retrofitted mixed-use

neighborhoods. The program’s objective was to create safe pedestrian areas where traffic speeds are slowed and the streetscape is

aesthetically appealing, thereby encouraging more pedestrian

activity and increased transit ridership. More recently, the program (now called “Boulevards”) has concentrated on removing

access barriers and reducing pedestrian and auto conflicts while

still accommodating traffic. Some roads are as much as nine lanes

wide at certain intersections; one focus of the Boulevards program

will be enabling pedestrians to cross these streets safely.

Improvements include texturized crosswalks, widened sidewalks,

off-street pathways, midblock crosswalks, intersection improvements, medians, curb extensions, street lighting, pedestrian

plazas, and other amenities.15

5.

Develop walking awareness and promotion programs.

Due to a lack of available information, many residents may simply

not know about existing safe and convenient pedestrian routes to

their desired destinations. Communities with an effective pedestrian information strategy can reduce the amount of land used for

transportation, improve overall community health and reduce

obesity, boost community interaction, and make neighborhoods

attractive and livable. 

Walking awareness programs can inform community members

about pedestrian infrastructure and services. Newsletters, maps,

walking guides, and pedestrian-scaled signage

may promote available and planned walking

routes as well as the benefits of walking to

nearby destinations. Collaboration among

health, safety, building, transportation and land

use planners, and community development

stakeholders can facilitate an awareness campaign that touches upon a broad range of issues

and reaches a diverse audience.

Walking promotion programs can substantiate

walking as an achievable and convenient means

of transportation. Local walking events, street

festivals, and community walking tours introduce

community members to the available infrastructure and can be an outlet for information about

available routes, health benefits, safety, and

pedestrian rights and responsibilities. Public and

private entities can work together to provide

support and incentives for programs like walking

contests with prizes, step counters, and information packets. Media can work with local government officials and planners to specifically promote and inform residents about available trails and routes. For

example, the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper publishes “Get

35

The Ped-to-MAX program made

this intersection safer for pedestrians in Gresham.

Photo: city of Gresham
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Out,” a section dedicated to updating Boulder, Colorado, residents about new local facilities, trails, laws affecting recreation,

recreational programs, and more.16

6.

Use modern technology to increase pedestrian safety.

The primary focus of efforts aimed at making streets and sidewalks safer and more accessible is on good engineering and design

practices-narrower streets, pedestrian islands, curb extensions,

and wider sidewalks. Undoubtedly, these are the areas where the

greatest gains are to be had. Yet, new technology can also play a

role and, in conjunction with better-designed streets and sidewalks, can improve safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and

motorists. For example, crosswalks with automated in-pavement

flashing lights can be used to notify drivers when pedestrians are

crossing.17 Countdown signals mounted on crosswalk signs indicate to pedestrians the amount of time remaining to safely cross

before the light gives automobile traffic the right of way. For

areas of frequent pedestrian-automobile conflicts, the states of

Florida and Washington have added roving or animated eyes to

traffic lights. By “looking” in the direction of pedestrian activity

or at the crosswalks, the eye images remind drivers to look out for

people crossing or those who may be active on the side of the

road.18 Infrared pedestrian detectors activate traffic signals and

pavement flashers when the pedestrian passes the sensor on one

side of the street until the pedestrian crosses the sensor on the

other side.19 Similarly, when microwave sensors detect pedestrians

as the light is about to change, they extend the light in six-second

increments until they no longer detect the pedestrian.20 Audible

signals are particularly useful for pedestrians with impaired vision,

as well as for those who have been momentarily distracted from

the common visual signals at crosswalks.

7.

Use visual cues and design elements to indicate pedestrian

rights of way and minimize conflicts.

Automobile and pedestrian interactions can make a trip to the

nearby grocery more like an obstacle course than a short errand.

Sometimes drivers fail to look for nonmotorists when turning, or

they sometimes stop in the middle of the crosswalk. At other

times, poorly placed landscaping elements, signs, and utility

equipment may obstruct views for passing walkers and approaching drivers. Pedestrians who do not find a crosswalk handy may

unexpectedly enter traffic in order to cross a street. Pedestrians,

bicyclists, and drivers alike are often unaware of existing traffic

laws or fail to comply with them.

Many traffic authorities are testing new crosswalk markings, sign

placement, lighting, and other transportation design elements and

methods to improve driver and pedestrian awareness. Traffic engineering studies can help determine where and why problem spots

are occurring and what may be the proper remedy. Removing

impediments to lines of sight, updating and educating travelers

about traffic laws, and using well-articulated markings for pedestrian-automobile interaction zones can reduce the threat of accidents. Dangerous intersections can be retrofitted by reducing curb

radii to reduce vehicle speed or by allowing on-street parking or

curb extensions. These strategies narrow street entrance and exit

points and also improve safety for pedestrians by placing them

where they can see the vehicles better (and where the drivers can

see them) and by reducing the distance they need to travel to cross

the street. Well-articulated street-level or overhead signs both

warn pedestrians to watch for cars and emphasize the pedestrian

right-of-way to approaching cars. Breaking up street continuity

PRACTICE TIP:

Bricks are a popular choice in

many communities because of their

attractiveness. However, they

require high maintenance, can create a tripping hazard for many

pedestrians, and can serve as an

obstacle for wheelchair users.

Tinted, stamped concrete can serve

as a substitute if care is taken to

reduce gaps and bumps. If bricks

are desired, designers might consider using them only to line the

edges of a street or sidewalk in

order to mark boundaries.

For more information on designing

facilities that are accessible for 

all pedestrians, see “Building a 

True Community” at www.

access-board.gov.

36
CREATE WALKABLE COMMUNITIES 

using colored pavements, signs, or highly visible crosswalks also

can communicate frequent pedestrian activity to drivers.

Policy makers can establish the framework for safe, accessible,

walkable communities by enacting and revising pedestrian rightof-way laws, and posting information about the rules and fines for

noncompliance on highly visible street signs. For example, San

Francisco’s right-of-way laws fine drivers $104 for failing to yield

to pedestrians in a crosswalk or for not allowing them to clear the

street before driving through a green light.21

8.

Situate parking to enhance the pedestrian environment and

facilitate access between destinations.

Parking lot design may force pedestrians to take unsafe routes

between parked and moving cars to reach nearby destinations

without the benefit of sidewalks or other guidance. The design of

large surface parking lots in urban centers may cause pedestrians

to walk further to access otherwise adjacent buildings. Large

parking areas located in front of buildings separate pedestrian

traffic from businesses and leave walkers isolated in an unappealing environment.

Well-designed parking can actually enhance convenience and

accessibility for those on foot. For example, on-street parking

may reduce auto speed and function as a barrier between pedestrians and cars. Parking that incorporates sidewalks, crossings,

signs, and other pedestrian-scaled features and is situated in proximity to multiple destinations can provide a connection to a variety of activities, instead of making it difficult to go from errand to

errand. 

Many cities are now creating parking districts to raise funds to

help solve urban parking problems; land for large parking areas

may be too expensive for each business to provide individually,

yet each business often must provide some parking spaces to

remain competitive. Consolidated structured parking approaches

may actually reduce the overall amount of parking needed in a

business district. 

Another strategy is intercept parking, which can be used to relocate land-intensive parking from business centers and neighborhoods to cheaper neighboring areas and communities while maintaining walkable densities and reducing downtown traffic congestion. Individuals taking advantage of intercept parking should be

provided with logically defined, safe, and continuously marked

paths from parking spaces to final destinations.22

Local government ordinances can provide incentives for pedestrian-friendly parking while restricting parking designs that limit

or prevent pedestrian traffic. Parking standards for the city of

Denton, Texas, prohibit locating large parking lots on the side or

in front of buildings and give parking credits to those who

develop on-street parking that is available to the general public.

Additionally, the standards require pedestrian access along a path

or sidewalk.23 

9.

Make places walkable for aging populations in response to

new demographics and special needs.

The aging of the U.S. population—by 2030, one in five adults

will be over the age of 65—underscores the importance of creating walkable communities with older adults in mind.

Incorporating specialized community design strategies, such as

changes in streetscape design, and pursing long-term options

PRACTICE TIP:

The city of San Diego created parking meter districts to raise revenue

for a variety of strategies to confront parking problems: parking

garages, maintenance, informational

distribution, parking advisory

boards, etc. See http://www.

sannet.gov/economic-development/

business-assistance/small-business/ 

districts.shtml.

37
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

related to housing, transportation, and land use can support walkability among senior citizens, enabling them to remain independent, to foster better health, and to actively participate in community life.

Attention to small design and functional details can significantly

improve seniors’ mobility on foot. For example, repairing uneven

sidewalks can reduce the risk of falls. Providing sheltered benches

at regular intervals (and at 90-degree angles to minimize twisting

and turning) can provide resting and meeting places. Traffic engineering strategies—such as extending the duration of crossing

signals and reducing crossing distances at intersections through

traffic calming measures (e.g., “bulb-outs,” refuge islands, and

other techniques)—can make it easier and safer for older adults to

cross streets. Moreover, since vision and contrast perception

become impaired with age, communities should provide sufficient

lighting and easy-to-read signage and minimize abrupt grade

changes or steep inclines. 

On a larger scale, close attention to the needs of the aging in local

regulations and as part of the development review process can

also help to create walkable environments for older people. For

instance, revising zoning codes to allow for accessory apartments,

“elder cottages,” and shared housing can create new opportunities

for older adults to live within walking distance of family, friends,

and basic services. In addition, localities should carefully consider

the location and design of new facilities, such as retirement and

assisted-living communities, to ensure that new developments are

designed to provide walkable connections to nearby neighborhoods and services and provide infrastructure for walking on site.

10.

Retrofit superblocks and cul-de-sac street networks.

Cul-de-sac communities were originally designed to separate

pedestrian and automobile traffic for safety and tranquility purposes.25 Unfortunately, most recent cul-de-sac communities provide few services and contain paths that end abruptly at subdivision boundaries, forcing pedestrians to take circuitous routes or

cross busy arterials to reach destinations that otherwise are only a

short distance from home. To address this problem, communities

can remove barriers and connect sidewalks and trails to services

and places to which residents would usually drive. The Legacy

Plan, adopted by Forsyth County, North Carolina, which

includes Winston-Salem, calls for greenways and paths that link

mixed-use developments and reduce travel distance between residences and other destinations.26 Wayfinding signage that displays

the direction to and distance between destinations helps guide

residents and alleviates traveling concerns about time and orientation (for more information, see Principle 5, Policy 4). 

FINANCE TIP:

Communities can use air quality

standards as an incentive to fund

pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

“In Atlanta, poor air quality from

traffic congestion forced the issue.

The region could not spend federal

transportation funds on new highways until it came up with a plan to

improve air quality. ‘The only projects we could build were the small

projects geared toward the pedestrian,’ says Tom Weyandt of the

Atlanta Regional Commission, the

metro area’s planning agency. ‘So

in a sense, we were sort of shocked

into it.’The region is spending $175

million to build 385 miles of sidewalks by 2005. That’s a small slice

of the region’s 16,000 miles of

roads and highways. But $350 million more over 10 years will go to

transportation projects tied to the

development of higher-density,

mixed-use areas. Those will be

mostly pedestrian improvements,

Weyandt says.24

38

Shade trees, benches, and attractive design

make this river walk in Savannah, Georgia, a

walkable environment for senior citizens

and other members of the community.

Photo: Local Government Commission
CREATE WALKABLE COMMUNITIES 

Many localities are retrofitting urban city centers by changing

large blocks into several small blocks to attract foot traffic with

comfortable and convenient routes between businesses and surrounding residential development. For example, in Kansas City,

Missouri, and Des Moines, Iowa, designers are emphasizing

pedestrian walkways and reinforcing the existing city grid to connect surrounding residential communities with downtown areas.27

RESOURCES:

Howe, Deborah A. Aging and Smart Growth: Building Aging-Sensitive

Communities. Translation Paper No. 7. Funders’ Network for Smart

Growth and Livable Communities, December 2001. Available online at

http://www.giaging.org/aging%20paper.pdf.

The National Center for Bicycling and Walking

(http://www.bikewalk.org/index.htm) 

The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center

(http://www.walkinginfo.org/) provides a clearinghouse of information

related to walking and community walkability.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian

Travel: A Recommended Approach, available at

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/community/pdf/PedBikeDesignGuide.pdf.

1 Nancy Humpel, “Environmental Forces Associated with Adults’

Participation in Physical Activity: A Review,” American Journal of

Preventive Medicine, 22, no. 3 (2002): 188-198.

2 See http://www.trans.ci.portland.or.us/plans/pedestrianmasterplan/

PedMasterPlan.pdf for Portland’s pedestrian master plan.

3 “Barriers to Children Walking and Biking to School: United States, 1999,”

MMWR Weekly, 51, no. 32 (August 16, 2002).

4 North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Making Current Trends

in School Design Feasible (Raleigh, 2000). 

Available at www.schoolclearinghouse.org.

5 California Safe Routes to School Clearinghouse,

http://www.4saferoutes.org/about_us.html

6 See http://www.ci.chi.il.us/cp/AboutCAPS/HowCAPSWorks/

WalkingSchoolbus.html.

7 See http://www.cawalktoschool.com/stickers.php.

8 See http://www.walktoschool-usa.org/.

9 See http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/

ActionsLocalHeatIslandEffect.html?OpenDocument for a fact sheet on

the heat island effect. 

10 More information on Cambridge’s pedestrian master plan can be found at

http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/envirotrans/walking/pedplan/index.

html.

11 Research shows that in many cases, transit ridership is higher at stations

that are oriented toward walkable communities with adequate pedestrian

infrastructure. “Study Favors Denser Development Along Virginia’s

Orange Line,” Washington Post, June 29, 2003, p. C8.

12 A high proportion of vehicle emissions results from cold starts and during

the first few minutes of an automobile trip. See

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/aqfactbk/factbk13.htm.

13 Robert Cervero, “Green Connectors: Off-Shore Examples,” Planning, 69,

no. 5 (May 2003): 25-29.

14 Ibid.

15 Rebecca Ocken, Improving Pedestrian Access to Transit: City of Gresham’s

Ped-to-MAX Program, at http://ntl.bts.gov/data/6_conference/

00778496.pdf; and the program Web site at http://www.ci.gresham.or.us/

departments/cedd/tp/programs_projects.htm#ped.

16 See http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/get_out/.

17 Rock Miller, PE, PTOE and George Dore, PE, “In-Pavement Flashing

Crosswalks—State of the Art.” See http://www.katzokitsu.com/

ingroundflash.htm. 

18 See http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/news/nov02/SR99RovingEyesFlyer.pdf for a

flyer publicizing a demonstration of this technology in Washington State.

19 See http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsmart/plport.htm#infrared for a

description of this technology as it is used in Portland, Oregon.

20 See http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsmart/nookit.htm.

21 See http://www.sfsafe.org/bro_hr/ped_right.pdf

39
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

22 Carfree.com offers an extensive compilation of information, ideas, and

guidance on creating car-free districts and cities and describes methods

used in existing car-free cities and districts around the world. East Lake

Commons near Atlanta, Georgia, envisions the use of intercept parking 

on the outskirts of the residential cohousing community to create a more 

habitable environment for residents, especially children. See http://www.

eastlakecommons.org/Ideals/vision.htm. 

23 See http://www.developmentexcellence.com/tools/docs/denton/

parking.pdf

24 Martha T. Moore, “City, suburban designs could be bad for your health,”

USA Today, April 30, 2003.

25 http://www.radburn.org/geninfo/history.html

26 http://www.co.forsyth.nc.us/CCPB/SEAPfinal.pdf

27 http://www.gouldevans.com/articles/art_urbanland_2000.htm

40
Chapter 5

Foster Distinctive,Attractive

Communities with a Strong

Sense of Place

Demand is growing for town centers, commercial corridors, public plazas, and transit villages that create a sense of place and

establish a unique identity for a community.

Charles Bohl notes in Placemaking: Developing

Town Centers, Main Streets, and Urban Villages

that approximately 100 new town center projects are planned or under construction and

more than 6,000 main street and downtown

revitalization projects are under way throughout the country.1 Developers and builders are

finding that tenants and homebuyers are willing

to pay a premium to live in a neighborhood

that is attractive and pedestrian-oriented and

that creates a sense of community. 

Photo: Local Government Commission
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

In response, towns and cities are looking to develop more of the

types of places that their residents can take pride in—the shopping districts and plazas where residents bring out-of-town visitors and frequent on the weekends, or well-designed, pedestrianoriented gathering places that focus on historical, cultural, or natural attributes—while creating opportunities to pursue a range of

activities in a small area. Many existing communities have such

features, and new developments can be designed to create central

gathering places and areas of civic pride. By preserving and maintaining the buildings and natural environments that make our

communities unique, we are creating places of lasting value that

serve as focal points for the current community and future generations. Historically, the public and private sectors have each

played a critical role in creating attractive and memorable places.

As the recommendations below suggest, this remains true today.

1.

Establish revolving loan funds for historic preservation.

Historic sites and buildings play a valuable role in educating new

generations about the nation’s culture and heritage. Many of

these places are unique and revered features in their communities.

Oftentimes, funding for the preservation of historic properties,

neighborhoods, and landmarks competes with budgetary allotments for libraries, parks, and other public amenities. Sometimes,

preservation funding comes from a state program whose budget

fluctuates from year to year and makes investing in the restoration

and rehabilitation of structures less predictable and reliable. 

To ensure adequate and sustained funding for historic preservation, some communities and preservation foundations are establishing revolving loan funds. Frequently, these funds are capitalized with an initial grant or with proceeds from a bond measure.

Loans are made to nonprofit organizations and local governments, and are dispersed with favorable interest rates and 10- to

20-year repayment terms. The principal and interest are then

returned to the loan fund for continued historic preservation.

New Jersey’s revolving loan fund is run by the New Jersey

Historic Trust (NJHT), a nonprofit historic preservation organization for which the initial $3 million funding came from a 1987

bond act. The fund itself was established by the Historic

Preservation Revolving Loan Fund Act, which was passed by the

state legislature in 1991. Currently, NJHT will finance loans that

range between $25,000 and $370,000. The interest rate on these

loans is no more than 4 percent, and the term of the loan repayment period is up to 20 years, although the usual range is from 5

to 10 years.2 

In Pennsylvania, the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks

Foundation’s revolving loan fund has been in existence since the

1960s. Rather than simply purchasing and restoring buildings, the

foundation increasingly provides short-term loans and technical

assistance to community-based organizations for historic building

restoration projects that provide affordable housing.3

By creating revolving loan funds, communities have more assurance that funding for historic preservation will be available

despite changing economic tides.

2.

Create community greens.

In older cities and towns, there is often a critical need for safe,

recreational green space for city residents. One way to address

this demand is through the creation of “community greens,”

which are shared parks incorporated into residential blocks. Often

42
FOSTER DISTINCTIVE, ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE

situated in vacant and blighted areas, these greens can provide

accessible and safe places for children to play and can improve

property values.

Usually, these community parks are voluntarily established by

households located adjacent to the vacant property or alley and

are intended for their use only. Residents either apportion parts of

their backyards into a larger shared yard or garden, or work with

the city government to transform neglected alleys or other properties into usable green space. In some new developments, shared

yards or squares are incorporated in the overall project design.

Local governments can encourage residents and/or nonprofit

organizations to create community greens through matching

grants, low-interest loans, design services, fence removal, and free

or low-cost plant supplies. 

In a lower-income, ethnically diverse neighborhood just south of

downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota, the Hope Community

Development Corporation (CDC) began purchasing houses to

create affordable rental units in the late 1980s. To create a sense

of community and provide shared recreational space, the CDC

removed private fences and developed a common area with a

pavilion, playground, and garden. Without the use of gates or

fences, the Hope Community used visual cues to establish privacy,

promote safety, and discourage crime around the common area.

In this instance, the open space is surrounded by homes fronting

the property, thus allowing residents to observe activity throughout the day.

3.

Turn underused highways into boulevards.

Many urban highways created during the 1950s and 1960s were

designed to move auto traffic quickly through downtowns. These

roadways changed the character of many existing neighborhoods.

In some cases, roadways were constructed with more capacity

than was needed. This can be the result of demographics change,

the addition of transit into an area, or other factors that caused

less demand for the roadway than originally predicted. Rather

than leave a large roadway with excess capacity, communities are

retrofitting them, making them multimodal, aesthetically pleasing, and attractive to new development. 

Boulevards are intended to serve multiple modes—cars, buses,

bicycles, pedestrians—efficiently and elegantly. Typically, a boulevard has four vehicular through-lanes (two lanes for each direction) with a wide, tree-lined central median. On the outer edges

of the through-lanes are a pair of landscaped medians that separate the faster moving traffic from a slow-moving, one-way traffic

lane for deliveries, bicycling, and parking. These secondary medians can contain another sidewalk and create a refuge for pedestrians so that they do not have to cross seven lanes of traffic at once.

Wide sidewalks run parallel to the parked cars and, coupled with

the local traffic lane, provide

a substantial buffer between

adjacent buildings and the

faster moving traffic in the

boulevard. The cross-section

shown at the right illustrates

one example of a boulevard’s

configuration and the various

widths associated with each

lane. The schematic is of

Octavia Boulevard, a roadway

under reconstruction in San

Francisco, California.

PRACTICE TIP:

Community Greens, a nonprofit

organization based in Arlington,

Virginia, is dedicated to helping

communities create these smallscaled neighborhood backyards and

has developed case studies, educational materials, and technical

assistance. For more information,

see http://www.communitygreens.

org/.

43

Cross-section of the planned

Octavia Boulevard in San Francisco,

California.

Courtesy: San Francisco Transportation Authority
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

In San Francisco, the 1989

Loma Prieta earthquake severely

damaged the elevated Central

Freeway. For many years, the

elevated freeway created a physical divide in the neighborhoods.

The freeway’s traffic noises and

visual barrier concerned residents, and the overpass created

an environment that limited the

success of the neighborhood’s

commercial district. By 1998,

residents voted against rebuilding the elevated freeway and in

favor of constructing an at-grade

thoroughfare on Octavia

Boulevard, which runs next to

the freeway. 

Octavia Boulevard is designed to

carry relatively rapid and nonlocal traffic. It allows for easier

through-driving than normally

configured streets because slowgoing traffic and parking maneuvers are contained in the oneway traffic lanes on each side of

the boulevard. To balance its

function as an arterial, Octavia’s

pedestrian realms create a safe and inviting space for nonmotorized travel.

Communities can work with their state Departments of

Transportation (DOTs) and their local public works engineers to

pursue opportunities to design streets that meet multiple goals.

Context-sensitive design approaches are being implemented and

supported throughout the country. Whether retrofitting an existing

roadway or planning for mobility needs in the future, transportation planners should look for opportunities to create streets that are

inviting, serve all users, and create a quality urban environment. 

4.

Develop a comprehensive wayfinding system in town centers.

Whether a newcomer, a tourist, or a long-time resident,

“wayfinders” not only help people find which direction they need

to go to get to their destination, but they can also connect people

to local history, unique neighborhood features and attractions,

and the nearest transit stop. To be successful, wayfinding signs

must work for both motorists traveling at fast speeds and slowmoving pedestrians who may be exploring sites along the way.

They must organize a large amount of information in visually

simplistic ways with consistency in size, graphics, and color. 

Designers of wayfinding systems use the signs as opportunities to

promote the diverse activities in a city. In many downtowns,

chambers of commerce and business improvement districts are

discovering that wayfinding systems can increase attendance at

featured venues.5

Pedestrians are often willing to walk farther if directional information is available and easy to understand. Walk! Philadelphia is a 

signage program geared toward pedestrians that includes neighborPRACTICE TIP:

In its groundbreaking city plan, Blueprint 2020, Denver has pioneered a

new concept of “zoning for streets.” Conventionally, categorizing street

function forms a hierarchy of streets, ranging from those that are primarily

for travel mobility (arterials) to those that are primarily for access to property (local streets). This kind of classification ignores or de-emphasizes

modes of travel other than cars and does not consider surrounding land

uses. Under Denver’s system, streets are defined by their relationship to

adjacent land use and their function for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit.

In Denver, multimodal streets are zoned as residential streets, main streets,

mixed-use streets, commercial streets, industrial streets, landmark streets,

and one-way couplets. For example, a main street serves the highest-intensity retail and mixed land uses in the downtown and neighborhood centers.

The streets typically have between two and four travel lanes with on-street

parking. To create a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere, main streets will likely

have wide sidewalks, street furniture (e.g., benches, information kiosks,

trash receptacles, etc.), outdoor cafés, plazas, and other public spaces.4

44

Rendering of Octavia Boulevard,

San Francisco, California.

Courtesy: San Francisco Transportation Authority
FOSTER DISTINCTIVE, ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE

hood maps illustrating

the street network and

locations of attractions and landmarks.

Funding for the project was provided by

grants and capital

funds from the city

budget. The city collects fees from the venues listed on the signs to

fund annual maintenance. 

In these cases, and in many others around the country, wayfinding

systems are about more than getting from point A to point B: they

create an identity for the city, bring new visitors to attractions, and

make it easier for people to get acquainted with the town.

5.

Use distinctive public transit to increase the attractiveness of

neighborhoods.

Transit is not usually thought of as a tool for creating a sense of

place, but in cities like Boulder, Colorado, and Portland, Oregon,

new bus and streetcar systems are creating distinctive and unifying links in neighborhoods. In these places, the transit systems are

designed to reflect the character of the neighborhoods, each with

a unique identity and amenities. 

In 1989, Boulder’s City Council allocated federal and city revenues to plan, implement, and operate a community-based transit

system. GO Boulder, the city’s transit agency, created the

Community Transit Network (CTN), the mission of which was

to run a fleet of small, colorfully designed buses with high-frequency, inexpensive, and direct service within the city. Presently,

CTN sponsors six individual bus lines—Hop, Skip, Jump, Bound,

Dash, and Stampede—each with distinctive identities. 

A citizen design panel developed community-based design guidelines for each of the bus lines. All six of the fleets are comprised of

neighborhood-scale-sized vehicles appropriate for Boulder’s context. Each line is brightly colored and reflects various themes. For

instance, the Skip Line, which serves riders who commute to

work or school during the day and use the bus for a night out on

the town, has graphics that show an energized commuter with a

coffee cup. The Jump line, which travels semirural streets to a

community outside of Boulder, displays cows, snowflakes, a windmill, and a cozy home—all things travelers would see on the

route. In total, the CTN moves 15,000 passengers each day and

continues to expand its system.6 

In Oregon, a new system links the museums of Portland’s downtown cultural district to the galleries, restaurants, and shops of

the revitalized Pearl District and

Northwest/Nob Hill neighborhood. The streetcar also travels

through an emerging neighborhood, the River District, which

has 34 acres of centrally located

abandoned rail yards that will be

transformed into new housing.

The River District Vision, a plan

adopted by the city in 1992,

positions the streetcar as a central feature to connect lofts,

apartments, condominiums, and

businesses in the district with

45

Walk! Philadelphia signs help

pedestrians orient themselves

downtown. Design by Joel

Katz Design Associates, 1995.

Streetcar Lofts Condominiums

designed by Robert S. Leeb

Architects + Planners.

Copyright 2002

Courtesy: Center City District, Philadelphia

Photo: Richard H. Strode, Strode Photographic, LLC.
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

the rest of downtown Portland and the city’s light-rail system.

The new streetcar has become such a defining feature of the area

that one condominium project, the Streetcar Lofts, urges

prospective buyers and residents to “go by streetcar.”7

6.

Highlight cultural assets through public art and event nights.

The arts are an essential way of establishing a sense of place in a

community. Whether through public sculptures woven into the

streetscape, murals on building walls, or galleries sponsoring

neighborhood walks, the arts bring vitality to urban areas in large

and small towns alike. Art-related activities create a broader sense

of community in neighborhoods and connect them to other

places. For example, researchers Mark Stern and Susan Seifert

found that most of Philadelphia’s arts and cultural activity is concentrated in neighborhoods near the center of the city. They discovered that these centrally located neighborhoods have a higherthan-average mix of incomes and professions, and that 80 percent

of the people who participate in events there came from elsewhere in the region.8

In 1988, the city of Tucson, Arizona, adopted the Tucson Arts

District Master Plan, which is managed by the nonprofit Tucson

Arts District Partnership. The partnership represents citywide

interests of the arts, businesses, economic development, tourism,

historic preservation, and neighborhood communities. The district was created to funnel arts and cultural resources into a central area that would help to rejuvenate Tucson’s core. To bring

people to the district, the partnership hosts a variety of activities

throughout the year, including art walks, street fairs, and free performances.9 

Los Angeles, California, is often considered the mural capital of

the world. Estimates calculate that there are more than 1,500

public murals painted on walls both indoors and outdoors. Over

the decades, these murals have reflected the history and changing

culture of the city. From publicly sponsored New Deal art to contemporary grassroots scenes on the sides of buildings, murals

have become an expression of the times in the city. As Los

Angeles has realized the uniqueness of its public art, government

institutions (such as public libraries, police stations, and the

Metropolitan Transit Authority), corporations, and community

organizations have begun to sponsor the upkeep and creation of

new murals. 

These examples show that public art and artists’ districts can be a

powerful attraction for cities. By featuring art that occurs organically or by sponsoring special events, towns and cities can highlight

their unique character and bring joy to residents and tourists alike.

7.

Use asset-based tools and resident engagement to reflect

community values.

Creating a sense of place can be a daunting task for a community.

In underdeveloped, transitional, or blighted areas, residents may

be overwhelmed by daunting challenges and may find it difficult

to focus on the assets that are already there. “Community Asset

Inventories” are tools that encourage residents to start with the

resources that already exist in the community: the skills and abilities of residents, the work of neighborhood associations, and the

existing institutions in an area. Using asset inventories can help

residents focus on protecting and enhancing the people and the

places they value while adopting new ideas to help them meet

their goals. 

PRACTICE TIP:

The Project for Public Spaces

(PPS), a nonprofit organization

based in New York City, uses a

“place audit” to get community

input about the comfort and image

of a place (which could refer to a

street, plaza, or neighborhood corner). Participants are asked to

judge the assets and problems of

the space and to identify the shortand long-term opportunities that

they envision for the place. This

experiential tool is easy to use and

can engage the public in the planning process to create a place that

is both attractive and reflects the

community’s values. (For more

information, see http://www.

placematters.com/Placemaking/

Placemaking_v1.pdf.)

46
FOSTER DISTINCTIVE, ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE

In Washington, D.C., the city’s Office of Planning has embarked

on the ambitious Strategic Neighborhood Action Plan (SNAP)

program to focus on short-term goals identified by community

residents throughout the District. Since January 2001, city planners have met with residents in D.C.’s 39 neighborhood clusters,

and the District has generated interest through public notices and

listserve announcements. Through these multiple meetings, participants create action plans that detail the top priorities in each

neighborhood (such as street cleaning and a greater police presence.) The planning office then assigns the relevant city agency to

implement the plans, and the mayor’s office uses the SNAPs to

inform and guide decisions on the city budget. SNAPs have given

D.C. residents an opportunity to identify how they want to

improve their neighborhoods and make them more attractive

places to live, work, and play.

Local governments and organizations can use asset inventories,

larger neighborhood action-planning efforts, or place-based

audits to provide a tangible and interactive experience for residents. Through these mechanisms, distinctive and attractive

places are created based on the values of the community.

8.

Revitalize the waterfront.

For the past several decades, communities have discovered that

revitalized waterfronts are a considerable asset. Riverfronts that

have been separated from neighborhoods by roadways, railways,

or large-scale industrial development have been opened up and

revitalized with parks, trails, housing, entertainment, and waterrelated activities. Cities can take the first step in recognizing this

natural resource and work with communities, developers, parks

departments, and civic organizations to make it a destination. By

targeting state and federal brownfield, transportation, and economic development dollars to waterfront areas, cities can provide

early funding for revitalization initiatives.

Baltimore’s Inner Harbor, once home to factories and maritime

industries, began its long process of revitalization in the 1970s.

Many of the parcels along the waterfront were contaminated by

past industrial use, making their redevelopment even more challenging. An aquarium, hotels, a convention hall, and a three-acre

retail and entertainment complex called Harborplace—all of

which capitalized on tourism as an economic development 

strategy—were the earliest parts of the Inner Harbor’s transformation. Recently the city has introduced a more diverse mix of

uses to the area: residences, office space, and non-tourist-oriented

retail. Through its ambitious brownfields program, assisted by

Maryland’s Voluntary Cleanup Program, many of the polluted

industrial areas adjacent to the Inner Harbor have been cleaned

up and are now being reused. As C. William Struever, head of

Struever Bros., an infill development firm, noted, “Baltimore has

a glorious opportunity created by the geography of the harbor,

which brings the waterfront right into the heart of downtown. I

don’t think there’s anyplace else that has the same intimacy and

diversity and excitement—and all so close to the harbor. We’ve

only begun to see what’s possible. Water is a magic thing.”10 

In New York City, the 550-acre Hudson River Park has redefined

the formerly commercial and industrial edge of the city as public

open space complete with a bikeway/walkway, a marine sanctuary,

13 public piers, and new parklands. The trail that runs through

the park and into northern Manhattan connects neighborhoods

and brings residents and commuters to the once inaccessible river.

In 1973, residents on the west side of Manhattan defeated proposals to rebuild the West Side Highway as a tunneled major roadFINANCE TIP:

The Waterfronts Florida

Partnership, launched by the

Florida Coastal Management

Program in 1997, helps participating communities revitalize, renew,

and promote interest in their

waterfront districts. Between 1997

and 2001, the Florida’s

Department of Community Affairs

designated nine Waterfronts

Florida Partnership Communities.

Each received two years of technical and financial assistance, funded

in part by state monies from the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration’s coastal grant program. Results have included nearly

7,000 hours of volunteer services;

$143,362 in private donations; and

$7.4 million in other public investment that resulted in completion of

16 capital projects, from creating

boardwalk features to beach

cleanups. (For more information,

consult http://www.dca.state.fl.us/

fdcp/dcp/waterfronts/waterfront.

htm.)

47
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

way built under fill extending into the Hudson River. Subsequent

designs developed by the West Side Waterfront Panel called for a

grand boulevard with a wide, planted median; safer pedestrian

crossings; and a bikeway/walkway on the western edge, with a linear park. These ideas were to become the basis for the current

design of the park. In 1998, Governor Pataki signed into law the

Hudson River Park Act, which formalized the creation of Hudson

River Park and Hudson River Park Trust—a city/state partnership charged with the design, construction, and operation of the

Hudson River Park. The popularity of this initiative is evidenced

by the nearly one million visitors who explore the city’s newest

park every year.11 

Office space or parkland, waterfront property is a limited asset in

almost all communities. It requires judicious planning to make

the most of precious space that is often inaccessible, neglected, or

contaminated from prior industrial use. 

9.

Make retail centers distinctive and attractive 

destinations.

In many places, stores are housed in cookie-cutter

regional malls surrounded by surface parking or can

be found in strip malls that appear at regular intervals

along busy arterials. Increasingly, these developments

are failing. Charles Bohl reports that “since the 1980s,

retail space has been growing five to six times faster

than retail sales: the United States is currently flooded

with almost 5 billion square feet of retail space of

which 500 million square feet is vacant.” 12

PricewaterhouseCoopers and LendLease pointed out

in a 2003 survey, “Emerging Trends in Real Estate,”

that “[f]amiliar problems, catalogued in past Emerging Trends,

persist in many suburban markets [...], including [...] banal commercial strips and gasoline alleys and the demise of older, less

strategically located regional malls.”13

While shopping continues to be a great American pastime, people

are looking for new, more attractive places to shop. In response,

retailers have been locating stores on older main streets and in

“lifestyle centers”—open-air shopping malls that are located in

town centers. Today’s attractive and successful retailing centers

pay careful attention to the pedestrian experience. They also capitalize on interesting architectural design to attract both retail tenants and surrounding office and residential development. 

Though constructed in the 1920s, the Country Club Plaza in

Kansas City, Missouri, offers many lessons for contemporary

retail design. This low-rise landmark, one of the first shopping

centers in the country, is a pedestrian-oriented, open-air market

designed with Spanish-style architecture and adorned with public

art, plazas, and fountains. Next to the historic market, a 60-acre

business district evolved over the following decades to both provide jobs for residents in the high-density apartment blocks surrounding the area and create stronger market demand for the

plaza’s commercial development. Celebrating its 80th birthday in

2003, the plaza still endures as a shopping destination, even as

additional retail, office, and parking projects have been added to

the original center. The building’s innovative design and highquality construction have ensured that the shops stay leased with

retail outlets and services. While the tenants may have changed

over the years, the plaza is still a central gathering spot for locals

and tourists alike. 

By the 1990s, Bethesda, Maryland, a first-ring suburb of

Washington, D.C., had grown into a dense office and retail dis48

Hudson River Bikeway, New York,

New York.

Photo: Crist Figueroa, Hudson River Park Trust
FOSTER DISTINCTIVE, ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE

trict with no focal point. To create a vital town center, the Federal

Realty Investment Trust embarked on a multiphased project

called Bethesda Row. Nearing completion, the project is a mix of

renovated and new structures that will house 600,000 square feet

of retail and office space. Shops and restaurants are designed to

evoke variety and uniqueness, featuring different storefront styles

and a mix of national and local tenants. In developing the project,

Federal Realty convinced county officials to establish a café zone

between the street and the sidewalk and to create an inviting environment for diners and pedestrians. A fountain, outdoor seating,

and shops are an attractive rest stop for cyclists and walkers who

use the popular 11.5-mile Capital Crescent Trail that connects

the District’s Georgetown neighborhood to Bethesda.

Creating attractive retail is a viable business strategy for developers and a boon for the residents and consumers who shop there.

The project becomes more than just a place to buy goods: it can

become a centerpiece for the community.

10.

Use transportation enhancements funds to create places 

of distinction.

Established under the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), the Transportation

Enhancements (TE) program, administered by the Federal

Highway Administration (FHWA), provides funding to state

transportation agencies to develop transportation projects that

improve community quality of life. The program directs state

DOTs to allocate 10 percent of their Surface Transportation

Program funds to transportation enhancements. Under the program, 12 activities are eligible for funding. They include providing facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, acquiring scenic easements and scenic or historic sites, beautification projects, historic

preservation, and rehabilitation of historic transportation structures. According to FHWA, more than $2.4 billion has been

invested around the country in over 12,000 projects since 1991.

Communities across the country have used TE funding to

improve streetscapes in town centers and to create attractive

bridges and paths for nonmotorized travel that become local

gathering places. In 1994, Minneapolis, Minnesota, used $2.2

million of TE funds to convert the Stone Arch Bridge, a historic

rail bridge that connected the west side of the Mississippi River to

markets outside of the city, into a bicycle, pedestrian, and trolley

bridge connecting downtown to the University of Minnesota

campus. From the popular bridge, travelers enjoy a view of the

downtown skyline, St. Anthony Falls, and the old mills on the

river’s banks. The bridge, listed on the National Register of

Historic Places, has spurred the redevelopment of the “Mill

District,” which will house a museum, offices, and residences and

accentuate the area’s industrial heritage. The bridge is also part of

a larger heritage trail and hosts a summer arts festival that is

widely attended. The bridge has become a valued landmark in the

city of Minneapolis. For descriptions of many other TE projects,

see the National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse at

http://www.enhancements.org/.

1 Charles C. Bohl, Placemaking: Developing Town Centers, Main Streets, and

Urban Villages (Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2002), 9.

2 For more information, consult http://www.njht.org/.

3 For more information, consult

http://www.phlf.org/services/presloanfnd.html.

4 For more information, consult

http://www.denvergov.org/dephome.asp?depid=1323.

PRACTICE TIP:

The Delaware Department of

Transportation (DelDOT) modified

its allocation of TE funds in order

to make the program more efficient

for local governments. DelDOT

replaced the 20-percent municipal

match with a sliding scale, under

which municipal contribution goes

down or up, depending on the project’s size. DelDOT replaced the

two-year project submission and

review cycle with a rolling submission policy that allows municipalities to submit projects for immediate review and authorization at any

time. Finally, DelDOT increased the

maximum reimbursement for a

project from $500,000 to $1 million.

49
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

5 Jeffry Corbin and Wayne Hunt, “A Single Voice,” American City and

County 118 (March 2003), 20-29.

6 For more information, consult

http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/goboulder/html/transit/index.html.

7 For more information about the Streetcar Lofts, see Robert S. Leeb

Architects and Planners LLC Web site:

http://www.rslarc.com/Index2.html.

8 Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities, The Arts

and Smart Growth: The Role of Arts in Place Making, Translation Paper No.

12 (April 2003).

9 For more information, consult http://www.tucsonartsdistrict.org/.

10 Edward Gunts, “Rolling Out the Welcome Mat,” Baltimore Sun, January 9,

2000.

11 http://www.hudsonriverpark.org

12 Charles C. Bohl, Placemaking: Developing Town Centers, Main Streets, and

Urban Villages (Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2002), 17.

13 PricewaterhouseCoopers and LendLease LLP, 2003 Emerging Trends in

Real Estate (New York: October 2002), 36.

50
Chapter 6

Preserve Open Space,

Farmland, Natural Beauty, and

Critical Environmental Areas

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that as of 2001, only 7 percent of

state, local, and private land area in the U.S.

was developed into residential, commercial, and

transportation uses.1 Of the remaining land, 28

percent remained forestland, 62 percent was

farm and ranchland (working lands), and 3 percent was other rural land (e.g., marshland, barren land, and farmsteads).2 These figures give

the impression that the U.S. has an abundance

of open space. Yet, the public continues to vote

to allocate resources to preserve more open

space and working lands. Since 2001, $11.7 

billion have been added to public coffers.3 The

magnitude of public support has placed open

space preservation at the center of many state

and local land-use programs.4

Photo: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Why is there so much support for preserving open space and working lands if the U.S. has 13 times more wetlands, forestland, and

working lands than it has developed land?5 The answer relates to

the close nexus between open space and quality of life, economic

development, and environmental protection. The 2000 Census

reported that over 80 percent of Americans live in metropolitan

areas. For many of these people, undeveloped land in their area is

their immediate concern. The relative abundance of undeveloped

land nationally is of little comfort to the family who drives hours to

get to the countryside or natural areas. This type of public concern

led Sonoma County, California, to preserve local working lands

and to create green “community separators” in order to direct

growth to existing areas and to create a sense of place.6

Local governments across the country are also realizing that

locally accessible open space can make a community an attractive

location for potential employees, raise property values, and stimulate tourism. Plentiful and accessible open space and working

lands were factors in Hewlett Packard, Intel, and Hyundai’s decisions to locate in Portland, Oregon.7 Open space and working

lands also require fewer community services than residential or

commercial development, which allows localities to save money

for other fiscal priorities. 

Preservation efforts are also driven by the environmental impacts

of losing open space and working lands. Forests, wetlands, meadows, and other natural areas provide essential ecosystem services

such as filtering runoff, storing carbon emissions, and maintaining wildlife habitat. These and other ecoservices can be damaged

as open space is replaced with parking lots, malls, office buildings,

driveways, and other structures. When these ecosystem services

are sufficiently degraded, communities are often forced to spend

large sums of money to construct technologies, such as water

treatment plants, that mimic natural functions. 

The following policies and strategies represent a broad range of

tools to promote open space and the preservation of working

lands as part of a community’s larger development process. Each

of these policies and strategies may not be applicable in all communities, but they can provide a starting point for communities to

create and preserve special human and wildlife habitats.

Furthermore, these policies are best used to create a regional

open-space network that helps identify which lands should be

preserved and which lands should be developed. 

1.

Link land conservation with other smart growth principles.

Open space conservation is closely tied with other principles of

smart growth, such as Principle 3, “create a range of housing

opportunities and choices,” and Principle 7, “strengthen and

direct development toward existing communities.” It is important

to implement these principles in combination with open-space

preservation efforts. Without them, conservation efforts can push

new demand into adjacent areas by simply shifting land conversion to other localities. Smart growth neighborhoods are important for effective land conservation because compact, mixed-use

developments use less land than the same number of units developed in the typical low-density pattern, thereby relieving growth

pressures on open space.8 Reusing previously developed land has

a similar impact.

In 2002, President George Bush noted that “one of the best ways

to arrest urban sprawl is to develop brownfields and make them

productive pieces of land, where people can find work and

employment. By one estimate, for every one acre of redeveloped

52
PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, FARMLAND, NATURAL BEAUTY, AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS

brownfields, we save 4.5 acres of open space.”9 St. Louis,

Missouri, is attempting to make this connection throughout their

metropolitan area. The city is working with the surrounding

municipalities to preserve open space and direct growth to existing communities.10 Their regional blueprint places a large focus

on redeveloping brownfields to achieve their goals. 

The state of Massachusetts has connected several smart growth

principles through its Community Preservation Act. The act provides state matching funds to local governments that adopt funding programs by local referendum. It requires that at least 10 percent of the combined state-local funds in each community must

be expended on each of three categories of activity: affordable

housing, open space, and historic and community preservation;

the remaining 70 percent can be allocated to any of the three

areas.11 By combining different goals within a single act, advocates

for housing, community preservation, and open space protection

begin to connect their interests and collaborate on allocations of

money that will deliver multiple goals—projects that deliver

housing, protect open space, and revitalize communities—instead

of remaining indifferent or even opposed to one another’s interests. Achieving multiple goals through a single investment is a

hallmark of smart growth.

2.

Use land management techniques and acquisition to protect

drinking water sources.

A recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study forecasted a need for capital spending of more than $150 billion over

the next 20 years to ensure the continued provision of safe drinking water.12 The majority of this estimate was derived from the

need to build water treatment, storage, and distribution infrastructure. Many communities are seeking to reduce the need for

costly infrastructure by preserving and managing watershed lands

for source water protection. 

Preserving open space upstream can help protect drinking water

resources by filtering out contaminants and chemical pollutants

before they enter the community’s water system. Critical areas for

water-quality protection include wetlands, buffer zones, riparian

corridors, and floodplains. Wetlands are especially critical in maintaining water quality since they are natural filtration plants. As

water’s flow-rate slows, water is filtered as sediments settle out.

Trace metals bound to clay carried in runoff also drop out and

become sequestered in the soils and peat at the bed of the marsh.

Thus, open areas can provide a natural mechanism for filtering out

the pollutants from development and other human activities.

Conservation groups and the cities of San Antonio and Austin,

Texas, have been actively protecting these natural filtering functions. They are acquiring

lands around Edward’s

aquifer, a source of drinking

water for millions of residents. 

Land management techniques can also protect source

water. Strips of vegetation

along streams and around

reservoirs provide important

buffers. These buffer zones

decrease the amount of pollution entering the water system. Tree and shrub roots

hold the bank in place, preventing erosion and its resultPRACTICE TIP:

For more information on land management techniques to protect

water resources, see the forthcoming EPA publication Protecting

Water Resources with Smart

Growth: 100 Policies at http://

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/

publications.htm.

53

Stream buffers are a proven strategy

for safeguarding water resources.

Courtesy: USDA, NRCS
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

ing sedimentation and turbidity. Detritus and grasses slow the

flow of runoff, giving the sediment time to settle and water time

to percolate, filter through the soil, and recharge underlying

groundwater. By identifying and preserving these critical ecological areas, communities are taking active steps to preserve and

enhance their water quality and supply. 

3.

Use an array of financing techniques to preserve open space.

A stable source of state government funding is the foundation of

an effective land conservation program.13 State funds can help

make long-term conservation goals clear and provide valuable

leveraging funds for local governments. For more than 30 years,

New Jersey’s land acquisition program, Green Acres, has provided

grants and loans to local governments and nonprofits. 

In 2003, the state announced that it would focus Green Acres

conservation efforts on increasing grant and loan funding for

recreational lands and parks in cities and older, densely developed

suburban communities, and that it would provide greater state

and local funding allocations focused on open spaces that protect

water resources and critical wildlife habitat. In addition, New

Jersey enacted more stringent measures to protect the original

conservation purpose of all Green Acres lands.14 

Local governments across New Jersey have been able to leverage

various sources of money using Green Acres funding. In 2001,

West Windsor Township, a community in west-central New

Jersey, was able to blend local sources of funding and Green Acre

monies with a low-interest loan for the New Jersey

Environmental Infrastructure Trust, which is dedicated to preserving New Jersey’s water supply. This transaction marked the

first time that trust funds have been used to help finance openspace acquisition.15 The trust has traditionally been used to fund

engineered solutions to water quality and supply issues such as

stormwater retention.16

4.

Establish priority-setting criteria for open space acquisition.

Since 1998, nearly $20 billion has been approved for open-space

preservation in local and state referendums.17 In many cases, however, communities are passing these bond referendums and other

financial instruments as a reactive measure to help preserve the “last

wetland” or the “last community farm.” While a reactive preservation strategy can preserve critical lands, it often does so in a scattershot way. Small, disconnected fragments of conserved land have less

ecological value as wildlife habitat, are less accessible to the public,

and have reduced value in directing growth than larger parcels connected by a green infrastructure of corridors. Communities can get

better bang for their buck by being strategic about which lands they

acquire—especially those communities with limited funding.

To help ensure that conservation efforts proactively enhance

green infrastructure, communities can establish priority-setting

criteria. Once a community has established an inventory of their

regional resources and conservation goals, a prioritization scheme

can help preserve land in a cost-effective way. It can be tailored to

protect endangered wildlife and native habitats, as well as to preserve more elusive attributes, such as a sense of place.

Prioritization systems can range from the simple to the complex

but are used to best effect when connected to a regional conservation plan. Maryland has combined its land acquisition programs

and green infrastructure assessment to ensure that public funds

are being expended on the most ecologically significant lands.

Using geographic information systems and principles of landPRACTICE TIP:

The Environmental Law Institute’s

Conservation Thresholds for Land

Use Planners provides practical

information on how to include landscape ecology principles into the

land-use decision-making process.

See http://www.elistore.org/

reports_detail.asp?ID=10839 for

more information.

54
PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, FARMLAND, NATURAL BEAUTY, AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS

scape ecology, Maryland developed a map of existing and potential “hubs” and “corridors” to protect breeding habitat and routes

for animal and plant migration.18

By itself, this green infrastructure assessment represents a good

prioritization strategy for both local and state land conservation

efforts. However, Maryland took it a step further by prioritizing

hubs and corridors according to their ecological importance and

their potential risk of loss to development. Hubs were ranked

from best to worst according to a number of parameters, including proportion of natural cover, number of stream sources and

junctions, and road density.19 Corridors were ranked similarly, following criteria such as the ecological ranking of the connected

hubs (as defined in the initial process), corridor length, and land

cover surrounding the corridor.20 Using feedback from biologists

and natural resource managers, the rankings were further refined

to produce a final score of “ecological importance.” These figures

were also considered with a separate ranking for risk of development. All hubs and corridors of statewide significance are considered ecologically important, but the relative rankings can be useful in prioritizing conservation efforts.21

5.

Incorporate land conservation into transportation planning.

The expansion of the nation’s road network has provided many

economic benefits, such as enhanced access to markets, increased

tourism, and reduced costs of many goods. However, roads have

ecological impacts as well. These impacts include animal mortality from construction and collisions, alteration of surrounding

habitat, spread of exotic plants and animals, and increased human

use.22 To ensure that communities are able to maximize the benefits and minimize the costs of transportation, land conservation

should be incorporated into the transportation planning process.

Often, long-range land-use planning is not conducted until transportation systems have already been expanded or put into place.

This strategy can have negative effects on the ecology and character of a community. In 2001, a unique partnership in McHenry

County, Illinois, among local, state, and federal agencies worked to

overcome these typical planning-process shortcomings. The goal

of the partnership was to create an intergovernmental comprehensive transportation and land-use plan that accommodated development while preserving the integrity of the ecologically significant

Kishawaukee River Watershed. The plan, funded by the Federal

Highway Administration’s Transportation and Community System

Preservation (TCSP) grant program, developed the transportation

plan for the Route 47/Kishawaukee River Corridor after a conservation-focused land-use plan was developed.23

A key part of the master plan was the development of growth

models and sustainability indicators, which were based on community and technical input from surveys, meetings, and workshops.

The models created scenarios depicting what land use in the

Kishawaukee River Corridor currently looked like, what it would

look like if it is built according to existing zoning codes, and what

it could look like if conservation-based measures were adopted. 

The sustainability indicators were designed to measure whether

the river corridor is being developed according to communityapproved conservation, transportation, and growth goals. Some of

the indicators were developed to address air-quality and light pollution questions, such as “How many nights in summer can you

see the Milky Way?” Another indicator was based on the “number

of successfully breeding pairs of Sandhill Cranes,” which contribute to the overall health of the corridor ecosystem. Other indi55
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

cators of the ecosystem’s health relate to the number of amphibians, the area water quality, and the amount of quality habitat. 

6.

Take advantage of nature’s ecoservices.

Nature provides many important services, ranging from water filtration to carbon sequestration to plant pollination. Yet, these

essential public services are often undervalued in policy making in

part because they do not have accepted monetary costs and benefits associated with them. Putting a value on ecoservices can be an

effective way to encourage open-space preservation and environmental stewardship in a market-based economy.24

One innovative attempt to take advantage of the value of natural

processes helped preserve one of the largest wetland complexes

on the East Coast. In 2002, Allegheny Energy sold roughly

12,000 acres of land in the Canaan Valley to the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service for $16 million—a cost in line with past sales for

comparable properties.25 However, Allegheny Energy was able to

report to the IRS that the market value of the property was worth

$32 million by incorporating the land’s “ecological assets.” This

allows the energy company to claim a charitable contribution of

around $16 million, potentially saving them several million dollars in taxes—a powerful incentive to dispose of the land for conservation purposes.

Allegheny Energy hired GreenVest, an environmental planning

firm, to sum up the Canaan Valley property’s eco-assets, which

included the property’s value as a mitigation bank, potential to

sequester carbon (i.e., “store” carbon emissions in the environment), and value as public open space. The Clean Water Act and

other environmental statutes require companies or individuals

that destroy wetlands or habitat in one area to restore and maintain them elsewhere. In response, mitigation banks have been

developed to allow developers to deposit and sell land rights to

meet the regulatory requirements. Using industry standards for

mitigation banks and comparables for the acquisition of open

space, GreenVest was able to add $16 million to the Canaan

Valley’s property value. In addition, prior studies of carbon

sequestration led the firm to include $15 per ton of stored carbon

into the assessment, thus adding $7 million to the property’s

value. 

Hurdles remain before the deal is final. For example, the IRS

needs to assess the type and the amount of ecological assets being

included in Allegheny Energy’s property value. The federal

agency must also determine the legal authority of the Canaan

Valley property to act as a mitigation bank. Regardless of the

IRS’s decision in this case, other energy companies have seen the

potential in eco-asset valuations and have begun investigating the

potential of eco-asset valuation to turn ecologically significant

land from tax burdens into profitable and functioning habitats.26

In another example of using ecoservices to protect open space,

Lee County, Florida, developed a plan to preserve open space to

both protect against floods and provide drinking water. After a

few rainy months, the county typically needs to drain stagnant

water to protect the area’s residents from flooding. However, this

practice prevents the replenishment of drinking water supplies,

which ultimately results in drinking water shortages during dry

months. The county is now embarking on a plan to acquire floodprone tracts to store water for later use and to open them for

public recreation.27 After the buyout and relocation of several

families are completed, the district will restore the land’s natural

characteristics and function, which will inhibit flooding, supply

56
PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, FARMLAND, NATURAL BEAUTY, AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS

county residents with water in dry months, and provide recreational opportunities. 

7.

Support tree preservation through public-private partnerships.

Trees are important components of a community’s green infrastructure. A healthy population of trees offers substantial environmental benefits, including cleaner air and water, quieter streets,

cheaper energy bills, cooler temperatures, and wildlife habitat.28

In addition, trees can provide numerous economic advantages,

such as increased property values and lower air and water remediation costs. As noted by American Forests, a nonprofit organization that promotes environmental restoration through tree planting and urban forestry, “employing tree conservation and forest

reforestation as a tool to clean up the air could save the country

billions while improving the quality of life for its citizens.”29

Like many other cities across the country, Albuquerque, New

Mexico, is facing tight budget constraints and recently ceased

replacing aging trees. In response, the city and a local nonprofit,

Tree New Mexico, partnered to create the Albuquerque Tree

Initiative. The mission of the program is to raise funds to replace

trees and plant additional trees in parks and other public places.

The partnership is working to increase the city’s funds by securing corporate and private donations and foundation grants,

encouraging community ownership of parks and public spaces,

and providing volunteer opportunities for local citizens, groups,

and businesses through tree-planting events.30 (See Principle 4,

Policy 3 for more information about trees in urban settings.)

As forestry economics change,31 unique opportunities are arising

for governments and corporations to partner with timber companies to save forestland, maintain jobs, and promote sustainable

tree-harvesting practices. For example, the state of Maryland,

Conservation Fund, Forestland Group LLC, and the Glatfelter

Corporation united in a partnership to protect 25,000 acres of the

state’s most ecologically significant areas. The acquisition will join

together 23,000 existing acres of forestland, 26 major river systems, and 89 watersheds. Eighty-seven percent of the land will

remain working forests subject to conservation easements that

extinguish development rights, ensure that sustainable forestry

practices are used, and protect water quality and important

resource features. The remaining acres are to be acquired by the

Conservation Fund and then transferred to the state of Maryland

once public funding is available.32

8.

Allow land trusts to compete for conservation funds.

Forging partnerships with land trusts can be an excellent strategy

for government agencies to achieve strategic and efficient land

conservation.33 Relative to government agencies, land trusts are

often able to make land deals more cost effectively. Typically nonprofit land trusts have more flexibility and discretion in deciding

how to purchase land rights (e.g., fee simple and conservation

easement). In addition, when compared with government agencies, land trusts may be better able to reduce transaction times

and costs. However, land trusts and similar groups are often not

eligible to receive conservation funds. As development pressures

increase at the fringes of metropolitan areas, so does the price tag

for acquiring critical environmental lands. Allowing land trusts to

compete for local, state, and federal funds could allow for a

greater quantity of land to be preserved for less money than if

land trusts were excluded. 

PRACTICE TIP:

For examples of urban tree ordinances, visit the U.S. Forest

Service’s South Region Web site at

http://www.urbanforestrysouth.org/

ordinances/index.asp.

57
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

South Carolina’s new Conservation

Bank allows land trusts to compete

with government agencies for the $8

million to $10 million of available

state funds designated for land

preservation.34 This state-run program was designed to ensure that the

“best lands and best projects are

selected.”35 To prevent scattershot

preservation, the bank includes selection criteria to determine the value of

proposals that are adjacent to large

ecosystems or protected lands and

corridors between protected areas.

Furthermore, to ensure accountability, the Conservation Bank is required to submit yearly descriptions of all approved grants and loans to the state, as well as all

acquisitions of land or interests in land obtained with bank funds. 

9.

Invest in the rural economy to preserve working lands.

Increasing agricultural land conversion36 and economic hardships

have made it difficult for many communities to preserve farms

and working lands, thus jeopardizing the profitability of farms

and the livelihood of farmers on the metropolitan fringe. If farming is not profitable, development of the land becomes a much

more attractive prospect. Moreover, with the farm population

aging, even profitable farms are sold for development when new

farmers cannot be found to purchase the land. Innovative preservation strategies that bolster local agricultural economies and preserve productive lands are important components of a smart

growth plan. 

New entrepreneurial agriculture is taking advantage of the growing market for high-quality, locally grown food and niche products such as organics.37 These often small operations bypass the

now common procedure of growing food products for large markets with thin profit margins. Instead, they sell their products

directly to nearby metro areas through farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture, and other local programs. The USDA

reports that the number of farmers’ markets has increased 79 percent from 1994 to 2002, with over 3,100 operating in 2002.38 The

farmers’ market renaissance is a promising strategy to keep farmers in business and to put productive farmland to work by stabilizing an area’s economy.

King County, Washington, supports local working lands by

matching a new generation of farmers with landowners wishing

to sell or lease their property for agriculture.39 The program,

dubbed FarmLink, was created to preserve the area’s small but

cherished agricultural economy and remaining rural character.

With 11 connections made since 2000, King County is hoping

that FarmLink will introduce urban residents to working lands

and therefore increase support for farmland preservation. As

Steve Evans, the King County “Farmsbudsman,” has noted,

FarmLink also helps local farms to “protect habitat and water

quality and to produce food that may be safer and that is fresher

and tastes better.”40

10.

Use innovative permitting approaches to protect critical environmental areas.

Long Branch, New Jersey, is using smart growth development to

reinvest in their coastal community and preserve the ecological

and economic benefits of their waterfront. This new direction

58

Farmers’ markets can be a great

strategy for supporting local farms

and creating public awareness of

the benefits of farmland.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, FARMLAND, NATURAL BEAUTY, AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS

began when the city received flexibility under the state’s coastal

zone management law to evaluate development plans on a comprehensive (considering several lots simultaneously) basis rather

than through traditional lot-by-lot reviews.41 This flexibility,

known as sector-based permitting, allowed Long Branch to consider habitat protection and economic development together in

determining the course of future waterfront projects.

In 1995, a developer proposed a city plan for Long Branch focusing on creating several development sectors that would contain a

mix of uses—residential, retail, office—along with a redeveloped

pier.42 This plan was intended to help transform the waterfront

into a year-round destination instead of a seasonal one. Creating

mixed-use and compact development along the coast, the plan

contended, would also concentrate development onto a smaller

percentage of the waterfront. Therefore, it would preserve a

greater area of coastal land than would be possible under the current plan.

However, New Jersey’s coastal management act was a barrier to

creating the mixed-use plan because it prevented regulators from

reviewing plans based on sectors. By using the state’s redevelopment plan, Long Branch and the state planning commission were

able to convince the New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection that the dual objectives of preserving the ecological

integrity of the waterfront and spurring economic development

could both be achieved by the sector-based plan.

Since the Long Branch success, New Jersey has incorporated sector-based permitting into its state regulations. The state has also

received federal approval to make the permitting a part of its

coastal management plan as governed by the U.S. Coastal Zone

Management Act.

1 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Inventory,

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/nri01/.

2 Ibid.

3 Trust for Public Land and Land Trust Alliance, Land Vote 2002: Americans

Invest in Parks and Open Space (Boston: Trust for Public Land, 2003)

4 Linda E. Hollis, AICP, and William Fulton, “Open Space Protection:

Conservation Meets Growth Management” (Washington, D.C.:

Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, 2002).

5 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Inventory,

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/nri01/.

6 Ibid.

7 Trust for Public Land. The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space. 

(San Francisco: Trust for Public Land, 1999).

8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Transportation and

Environmental Impacts of Infill versus Greenfield Development: A Comparative

Case Study Analysis (Washington, D.C.: EPA, 1999).

http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/infill_greenfield.pdf

9 Office of the Press Secretary, White House. “President Signs Brownfields

Bill.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020111-3.html

10 U.S. EPA. “Saving Open Space, Revitalizing Brownfields: St. Louis

Development Corporation.”

http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/st_louis.htm

11 Community Preservation Coalition, http://www.communitypreservation.

org/PotentialUses2.htm.

12 U.S. EPA. “Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey.”

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/needs.html

13 Chesapeake Bay Commission and Trust for Public Land. Keeping Our

Commitment. (Richmond, Va.: Chesapeake Bay Commission, 2001)

59

Wetlands provide many important

services, including filtering water,

providing habitat, and mitigating

flood damage.

Courtesy: USDA, NRCS
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

14 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. “DEP

Commissioner Campbell Announces New Green Acres Open Space

Priorities.” http://www.state.nj.us/dep/newsrel/releases/03_0107.htm.

15 http://www.westwindsornj.org/openspace_maneely.html.

16 Steve Jandoli, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,

Green Acres Program. Discussion with the author, June 2003.

17 Land Trust Alliance and Trust for Public Land (2003).

18 Theodore Weber and John Wolf, “Maryland’s Green Infrastructure—

Using Landscape Assessment Tools to Identify a Regional Conservation

Strategy,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 63 (2000): 265-277.

19 Ibid.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid.

22 Steven Trombulak and Christopher Frissell, “Review of Ecological Effects

of Roads on Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities,” Conservation Biology

14, no. 1, (2000) 18-30. 

23 Kishawaukee River Corridor Land Use and Transportation Plan,

http://www.cdfinc.com/Rt%2047-Kish%20Report.htm.

24 Robert Costanza et al., “The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and

Natural Capital.” Nature 387 (1997): 253-260.

25 Katherine Ellison, “Land and Eco-Assets for Sale.”Washington Post,

January 24 2002.

26 Doug Lashley, President, GreenVest. Discussion with the author, June

2003.

27 Chad Gillis. “Lee County Smart Growth Director: Less Drainage Would

Be Helpful for Parts of County.” Naples Daily News, June 15 2002

28 US Forest Service, Forestry Report R8-FR 17,

http://www.dnr.state.md.us/forests/publications/urban.html.

29 American Forests, Urban Ecosystem Analysis: Mecklenburg County, North

Carolina, Calculating the Value of Nature (Washington, D.C.: American

Forests, 2003).

30 Tree New Mexico, http://www.treenm.com/6PROGRAM.htm#ati.

31 Associated Press, “For Sale: Prime Timberland in South,” August 5, 2003,

available at http://www.usforestcapital.com/index.htm.

32 Christine Fanning, “Innovative Public-Private Partnership Will Conserve

Sensitive Wildlife Habitat And Working Forest,” The Conservation Fund

(2002), http://www.conservationfund.org/?article=2675&back=true. 

33 For more information on how land trusts can be beneficial partners, see

the first edition of Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Polices for Implementation. 

34 South Carolina Legislature, http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/code/t48c059.htm 

35 Dominic Parker, Cost Effective Strategies for Conserving Private Land

(Bozeman, MT: PERC, 2002).

36 Between 1992 and 1997, an average of more than one million agricultural

acres were developed per year. Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture’s

National Resource Inventory, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/NRI/

1997/summary_report/table8.html.

37 Patty Cantrell and Jim Lively, The New Entrepreneurial Agriculture.

Michigan Land Use Institute, 2002

38 USDA, Farmers’ Market Facts. http://www.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/

facts.htm

39 Patty Cantrell, “Seattle Gets to Farmland Preservation Through Great

Food,” Michigan Land Use Institute (2002), http://www.mlui.org/

growthmanagement/fullarticle.asp?fileid=16376.

40 Ibid.

41 Peter Buchsbaum. Long Branch Permit Coordination Case Study (Cambridge,

Mass.: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2002).

42 Ibid.

60
Chapter 7 

Strengthen and Direct

Development toward Existing

Communities

Many communities have experienced rapid

expansion at their edges, as growth has

moved to newer developments on the urban

fringe and away from the urban core and firstring suburbs. A growing number of communities are now recognizing the adverse consequences of abandoning neighborhoods, roads,

schools, sidewalks, water and sewer services,

and other infrastructure in urban centers and

older suburbs, only to rebuild them further out.

Smart growth directs development toward

communities already served by infrastructure.

The goal is to use resources that existing neighborhoods offer and to maintain the value of the

public and private investment already made in

those areas. Often, existing neighborhoods can

Photo: Joseph Schilling
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

accommodate much of the growth that communities require

through infill development, brownfield redevelopment, and the

rehabilitation of existing buildings.

However, there are a variety of barriers to development in existing communities and incentives for developing on the metropolitan edge, making greenfield development comparatively attractive

to developers. Land-use regulations, such as zoning and subdivision requirements, often make it easier to build in greenfield

areas. These areas may have little or no land-use regulation and

few residents who may object to the new construction. The cost

of greenfield development is often subsidized by the public sector

through many avenues, including the provision of road, sewer,

and water networks and the use of average-cost pricing, which

can underestimate the true per-unit cost of expansion.

A range of options exists to begin leveling the playing field

between greenfield and infill development and to help direct new

investment dollars to strengthen existing neighborhoods. The following policies are designed to address some of these issues and

to provide ideas and tools to strengthen and direct development

toward existing communities.

1.

Encourage the creation of a business improvement district.

Business improvement districts (BIDs) are frequently used as

tools to encourage revitalization and investment in targeted areas.

Although the state and local regulations required to implement

such an approach vary, most BIDs are designed according to a

common set of principles. Typically, local governments work

closely with commercial property owners to form a special district

within the community. Depending on the scope of the state and

local laws that authorize BIDs, the local government or an independent, nonprofit organization then levies a special fee from the

businesses. The proceeds from this levy are used to supplement

existing public services and foster improvements for businesses

within the BID. A board of directors comprising business and

local government leaders generally governs the BID. Recently, in

response to concerns expressed about the closed governance of

some BIDs, BID charters have been drafted to ensure a transparent community involvement process. Usually, BID activities

include some form of maintenance or beautification, security

improvements, and marketing of the district. Nonetheless, the

BID’s basic purpose is to enhance or revitalize the district and to

foster additional business activity. 

In 1996, approximately 15,000 BIDs existed throughout the U.S.1

Some of the better-known examples include the Times Square

BID in New York City2 and the Golden Triangle and the

Downtown DC BIDs in Washington, D.C.3 In these districts,

industrial and commercial interests joined city officials to foster

extensive reinvestment in their respective areas.

The usefulness of the BID model is not confined to large urban

areas. There is already an existing familiarity with this tool in

many small towns. BIDs continue to emerge in a wide range of

communities, from mid-sized cities like downtown Milwaukee to

smaller communities like Monterey Park, California; Norfolk,

Virginia; and Yonkers, New York.4

2.

Use priority funding areas to direct development toward 

existing communities.

Where state and local officials allocate public funds can be as

important as how they allocate those funds. Because private

development relies on the public sector to supply infrastructure

62
STRENGTHEN AND DIRECT DEVELOPMENT TOWARD EXISTING COMMUNITIES

and transportation to support new developments, public funds

can be a powerful tool in guiding and directing new development

into existing communities. To fully harness this latent potential,

some states and cities are developing priority funding areas

(PFAs) to efficiently target public investments.

The PFA approach is surprisingly simple. A governmental entity

designates a geographic area as a “priority area” for receipt of

infrastructure funding. This acts as an incentive to attract and

retain market capital. While development is allowed outside of

the PFAs, public resources do not subsidize it. This system has

several advantages: Localities consider and prioritize areas for

future development. These priorities send clear signals to the

market as to where development will be supported, adding predictability to the development process. Taxpayers benefit from

more strategic use of public funds, which can increase return on

investment and/or reduce costs.

Both state and local governments can implement PFAs. In 1997,

Maryland passed the Smart Growth Priority Funding Areas Act.5

Cities like Austin, Texas, and Sacramento, California, have also

begun to implement variations of the PFA model to direct development into existing communities. Under the Maryland law, local

officials designate areas where they want state investment to support future growth. Thereafter, the specified areas receive priority

for most of the state’s funding programs, including money for

transportation, water and sewer systems, and economic development. The legislation establishes clear criteria for designation of

areas and distribution of public resources, and requires state planners to maintain a current priority area map for the state. 

To ensure success, institutions that distribute public infrastructure

resources, like water and sewer or transportation funds, must

coordinate their actions and focus resources to ensure that PFAs

receive priority for all specified resources. Without either coordination or longevity, a PFA will be unlikely to attract significant

private-sector investment in the designated areas. 

3.

Offer home equity assurance programs.

Home equity assurance programs (HEAPs) have been used successfully in several communities to curb the tide of middle-class

flight, restore homeowner confidence in the local housing market,

and revitalize transitional communities by both retaining homeowners and attracting new residents and businesses. A HEAP is a

tool communities can use to reassure homeowners that their

biggest asset—their home—will not lose value due to changing

demographics, revitalization efforts, infill development, or construction of transportation infrastructure.

All HEAPs examined in a report by Liz Hersh for 10,000 Friends

of Pennsylvania in 2001 were either administered as government

programs or run by nonprofit community organizations.6 This

short report is a valuable resource for local governments and

other organizations interested in learning more about existing

HEAPs and options for how one might be structured. The report

concludes that Home Equity Assurance appears to be most effective in relatively stable communities that are facing transition and

where homeowners are the majority.

In a HEAP, the administering entity designates areas that are

either at risk of decline or targeted for additional development.

Within those areas, existing residential properties are insured

against devaluation. The term of the insurance is limited to a reasonable time period (typically five years) to allow changes or new

developments to fully integrate into the fabric of the neighborhood. A HEAP can be financed with a variety of mechanisms,

63
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

including bonds, general revenue, special

property-tax levies, or even a partnership

with the private sector. 

The first HEAP began in 1977 in Oak

Park, Illinois, an older, inner-ring suburb

outside Chicago, in response to concerns

about changes in the demographics of the

community (many residents thought

increasing density would hurt their property values). Called the Home Equity

Assurance Program, it relied on funds

generated from a small property-tax levy

on residential values to insure against

devaluation caused by new development.

Programs in Illinois are funded through a property tax levy that is

assessed of all homeowners in the service area. The viability of a

property tax levy as a funding base for HEAPs depends largely on

whether the governing entity has the authority and will to tax.

The range in rates in Illinois is from 0.08 to 0.12 percent. In participating areas, a majority of residents voted for the program by

referendum.7 The Oak Park program has not had to pay on a single claim, and the community continues to thrive within the

Chicago metropolitan region.8

HEAPs alone are not intended, and have not been shown, to

reclaim neighborhoods with multiple problems already experiencing long-term decline. Baltimore’s experience with Patterson Park

showed that threats to quality of life were motivating people to

leave the neighborhood, not an anticipated drop in the resale value

of their homes. The program was not as effective as the founders

hoped.9 However, HEAPs implemented as part of a larger package

of community measures can help retain residents and facilitate

planned changes in the community, such as increasing densities

through infill development or incorporating additional transportation facilities in or near residential neighborhoods. 

4.

Establish a land bank authority.

In cities and towns throughout the country, many neighborhoods

suffer the appearance of blight and decay as abandoned buildings

and vacant properties languish. In communities with a large number of vacant properties, one key barrier to returning such properties to productive use is inefficient public foreclosure and disposition procedures. Despite wide disparity among states governing

such procedures, most disposition processes suffer from onerous

time requirements as well as legal constraints that make transfer

of clear title difficult.10 Consequently, many local officials leave

lien-burdened properties vacant rather than undertaking the

arduous task of returning them to productive use. As a result,

such properties remain abandoned for many years, spreading

blight throughout the community and draining the budgets of

local government. 

One way of combating the problems presented by vacant and

abandoned properties is to establish a land bank authority (LBA)

designed to administer and return such properties to productive

use. Depending on the state authorizing legislation, an LBA can

serve as a clearinghouse for both publicly owned properties and

properties burdened by some form of public lien, including tax

liens and service fee liens, or by code violations. For publicly

owned properties, the public entity possessing title can transfer

ownership to the LBA for a nominal sum, allowing the LBA to

transfer clear title back to interested private developers or individuals. For burdened properties, the LBA can assume any public

64

Developers in downtown

Washington, D.C. are turning an old

office tower into Terrell Place, a

new mixed-use development.

Photo: Development, Community, and Environment Division, U.S. EPA
STRENGTHEN AND DIRECT DEVELOPMENT TOWARD EXISTING COMMUNITIES

liens and undertake the proceedings necessary to foreclose on the

lien, clear title, and make the property available to the private

market. In either instance, the LBA acts as a type of public broker, identifying available properties and automatically returning

them to productive use. In addition, the LBA can “bank” properties after establishing clear title in order to assemble larger parcels

for future development. LBAs can be structured in a variety of

ways: some are single jurisdiction; others are created by an agreement between a city and county.

Several cities—including Atlanta, Georgia; Cleveland, Ohio; and

Flint, Michigan—have established variations of the LBA model.

Atlanta, in conjunction with surrounding Fulton County, established the Fulton County/City of Atlanta Land Bank Authority

(also known as the Atlanta LBA) to inventory and dispose of

properties in tax arrears throughout the region. As part of its mission, the Atlanta LBA maintains a current inventory of all properties in tax arrears throughout the region and provides current

information to interested public and private parties. In addition,

with passage of special enabling legislation, the Atlanta LBA now

employs a special judicial proceeding to clear title to lien-burdened properties. Through this proceeding, it assures succeeding

titleholders that proper notice and due-process procedures have

been employed to protect them against subsequent challenges.

The Atlanta LBA can provide such assurance while simultaneously expediting the entire process, thus producing less risk and

cost for potential community developers.11 

5.

Create a development finance insurance program.

Older communities often initiate revitalization efforts through a

series of catalyst projects, including major infrastructure programs or commercial site development. The purpose

of these projects is to spur community development

by upgrading the physical environment.

Unfortunately, such ventures typically involve expensive development projects financed largely by the

community itself. Moreover, such projects can fail to

create the kind of revitalization originally envisioned

because they do little to build trust between the community and the private lenders who possess soughtafter capital funds. 

For most lenders, all aspects of development can be

reduced to the ratio of risk to return. Consequently,

officials seeking private capital investment in their

communities must target their efforts, at least in part,

to reducing the risks associated with development. A

development finance insurance (DFI) program is one

way to address the risk-return ratio without sacrificing extravagant amounts of public resources. 

A DFI program would operate on the same fundamental principles that form the basis of any system of

risk insurance. A local government would establish a

source of capital and use it to insure private lenders

against the risk of loss associated with construction

financing for projects designated as catalysts for community development. The key to the program is that

a community’s DFI fund is not directly expended on

the project itself. Rather, the local government works

in partnership with designated private lenders and

developers to form a financing package that comprises

private capital to pay for the cost of project development. The local government uses the DFI fund as a

PRACTICE TIP:

When planning for the reform of state or local

property disposition procedures, incorporate at

least the following stakeholders in the process:

• Representatives of local tax-collection entities

have experience with the system of foreclosure

on public liens; thus, they are a valuable source

of information on what requires change and

what currently works.

• Local government attorneys have information

about existing statutory authority and current

constitutional requirements for disposition proceedings.

• Representatives of local community-development entities will make the case for reform

because of vacant property impacts.

• Representatives of local title insurance companies understand what measure of certainty title

insurance companies will require of local disposition proceedings before issuing insurance on

the titles of properties disposed therein.

Source: Frank S. Alexander, Renewing Public Assets for

Community Development. A Report for the Local

Initiatives Support Corporation (New York: LISC,

October 1, 2000).

65
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

form of escrow that lenders may draw upon in the event of default

on a private construction loan.

A DFI program offers a number of important benefits. The most

obvious advantage to such programs is that they conserve scarce

public funds while allowing communities to facilitate important

development projects. Thus, where private lenders may balk at

mixed-use development in older communities because of concerns generated from conventional lending practices, a DFI can

bridge the gap between risk and return. 

As public officials develop a financial stake in reducing the risks

associated with project development, they become better at communicating with private interests who share their concerns. These

programs are intended to motivate investment; however, by their

nature, they tend to involve more players and result in a more

complicated deal structure using multiple sources of equity, debt,

etc. Care must be taken to ensure that the program does not ultimately result in a longer (and more costly) development timeframe, negating some of its advantages.

A community DFI fund would serve as “gap filler” for projects

where the value of the financed principal is greater than the value

of the incomplete project site. In addition, city officials should

incorporate risk-reduction policies into a DFI program to minimize risk through developer and project selection. DFI programs

should incorporate a wide variety of stakeholders in the process,

including lenders and private developers, representatives of nonprofit and community interests, and representatives of the local

commercial sector. By gathering input from these groups, city

officials will help ensure that the DFI program fosters projects

beneficial to the entire community with broad-based support.

6.

Develop asset-driven market analysis to encourage commercial and retail investment in underserved communities.

Many communities, particularly those that have experienced population declines, have also lost commercial and retail investment,

leaving markets underserved. This is largely the result of conventional market analyses that conclude that older communities with

higher concentrations of moderate- to low-income households

lack the buying power to support stores and businesses. These

analyses often fail to take the population density of urban areas

into account, focusing instead on average household income. In

fact, retail is currently overbuilt in many suburban areas around

the country and urban centers are an important untapped market.

The urban market is underserved for everyday shopping needs

and represents an opportunity for retailers. National retailers are

beginning to make this realization and act accordingly.

Michael Porter of the Harvard Business School notes that urban

populations do not always have a high per-capita income, but they

represent enormous net buying power. In a 1995 Harvard Business

Review article, Porter examined the overlooked assets of older,

centrally located communities: strategic location, local demand,

integration within the regional cluster, and available human

resources.12 According to Porter, these assets, when properly

packaged, are key to educating commercial and retail interests on

the latent opportunities of central cities and older-ring suburban

markets.13 He notes that the central location of many older communities within the metropolitan region affords unique advantages for commercial interests, such as access to skilled labor markets. Properly packaged and marketed, such information can

attract investment and assist community leaders in overcoming

obstacles to new business development. 

66
STRENGTHEN AND DIRECT DEVELOPMENT TOWARD EXISTING COMMUNITIES

By analyzing the Austin community in the Chicago metropolitan

region, for example, a research team at the Brookings Institution

demonstrated that local residents generated nearly $98.2 million

in grocery purchases outside the community because of the lack

of available grocery retailers.14 This kind of information is valuable in attracting additional grocery stores, a strong stabilizing

presence for communities everywhere.

7.

Encourage infill by adopting innovative stormwater 

regulations and practices.

Development activities, both during construction and after a project has been built, are cited as factors that worsen the effects of

stormwater runoff.15 Sediment from construction sites and debris

and chemicals are carried to streams during heavy rainfalls. As

more land in a watershed is built on, less rainfall soaks into the

ground, increasing the amount of runoff that eventually makes its

way to receiving waters.

While localities still invest in storm drains, stormwater sewer systems, and large containment areas, many also require developers

to take measures with their projects to control stormwater.

Stormwater retention ponds and infiltration areas are common

practices that are written into local regulations. However, developers in urban areas are finding that requirements stipulating that

stormwater be managed on the project site are a barrier to redevelopment and construction of infill and more compact projects.

Land for onsite stormwater management is often not available or

is prohibitively expensive. In addition, codes that limit the

amount of impervious surface that can be built on a site discourage both development in urban areas and compact development.

Inflexible stormwater regulations applied in urban areas can have

the unintended effect of worsening water quality by forcing

development to undeveloped fringe areas. 

Fortunately, there are innovative options that foster redevelopment and control stormwater. In 2002, the city of San Diego

adopted a policy of allowing infill redevelopers to share in the

cost of stormwater abatement in lieu of onsite mitigation. Instead

of requiring treatment of each individual project, the Standard

Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan allows developers to contribute to stormwater mitigation that serves the entire drainage

basin. Engineers estimate that individual development projects

can achieve savings of up to $40,000 by participating in a shared

stormwater control program.16 The Low Impact Development

Center, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting water

resources through site-design techniques, is sponsoring research

on low-impact development techniques that require less space.17

One technique is the use of soil amendments that allow compact

landscaping to absorb and hold stormwater without causing

flooding or damage to adjacent buildings.18

Local jurisdictions are learning about different ways to satisfy

stormwater and drainage issues associated with development and

are exploring offsite mitigation possibilities. The possibility of

offsite mitigation makes smaller infill projects more feasible and

provides an opportunity to locate mitigation facilities in a way

that can serve multiple projects.19 In return for offsite mitigation,

jurisdictions could increase allowable densities in downtown and

designated areas. In such a case, the municipality would become

accountable for maintaining water quality in that particular basin. 

67

PRACTICE TIP:

In Minneapolis, a community market analysis was included as part of

the 46th & Hiawatha Station Area

Master Plan.The plan and the market analysis focus on land uses,

urban design, public infrastructure,

and amenities located within a halfmile of a light rail station, and a

consultant was hired to evaluate the

market support for various land

uses within a half-mile radius of the

planned 46th Street Light Rail

Transit.This analysis identifies market opportunities for various land

uses over time. Market conclusions

and implementation considerations

are summarized and addressed.
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

8.

Increase transit-oriented development by adding infill stations

on existing transit lines and retrofitting existing stations.

Communities often overlook the potential of existing transit facilities to encourage additional development. Properly located and

designed transit stations can boost surrounding property values

and encourage additional residential, retail, and commercial

development.20 Adding or upgrading stations is a cost-effective

way to encourage transit-oriented development. Because the transit line already exists, the capital-intensive process of developing a

new system can be bypassed. Adding or improving stations garners many of the same benefits for the community that a new

transit system produces. 

Officials in Washington, D.C., have already begun to capitalize

on the city’s extensive Metro rail system to encourage additional

development around many of the city’s stations. Along the system’s Red Line, officials are developing an additional Metro station at New York Avenue in the heart of downtown. The new station will connect local residents with downtown amenities and

facilitate the growth of additional stores and businesses throughout the surrounding neighborhoods. 

The promise of a new station has already begun to attract capital

investment in the surrounding neighborhoods, boosting property

values and encouraging new residential growth. A group of private property owners agreed to collectively pay $25 million

(through a 30-year special property tax assessment) to build the

station, and they are also donating the land to the Washington

Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). This money was

supplemented with $31 million in federal funds and $34 million

in city contributions. Public investment in the area includes $100

million in federal funds for the new national headquarters of the

U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on

vacant city-owned land adjacent to the Metro station. Officials

believe that the goals to generate one billion dollars of public-private investment and 5,000 jobs by the time the Metro station

opens in late 2004 will easily be surpassed. All of these considerable benefits will be achieved using an existing transit line.21 

9.

Develop a revolving loan fund to support local independent

businesses.

Local independent businesses often suffer when the surrounding

community faces decline—or enjoys revitalization. During

decline, local businesses lose market share to large national chains

that sprout up in the newer fringes of the metropolitan area.

During revitalization, local businesses can be displaced when

national chains move in. Consequently, local independent businesses represent the most vulnerable link in an existing community’s chain of commerce. To prevent the loss of such vital assets,

community leaders can employ strategies to protect local businesses. One such strategy is use of a revolving loan fund (RLF) to

protect and support local independent businesses. 

An RLF is a capital fund designed to serve as a lender of last

resort in high-risk transactions. The fund is initially capitalized

out of a municipal/local government budget. Fund administrators

use the RLF to provide financing to targeted community members at below-market interest rates and with tailored underwriting. The returns generated by payments plus interest on the initial loans “revolve” back into the lending pool for subsequent

loans. Consequently, a properly managed RLF can continue to

service a targeted population for a number of years without

requiring additional capital from the community. 

68
STRENGTHEN AND DIRECT DEVELOPMENT TOWARD EXISTING COMMUNITIES

RLFs often entail high-risk lending at intentionally low interest

rates. Fund managers can mitigate risk of default by devoting

resources up front to learning about the needs and limitations of

the target population. Using this information, officials can implement underwriting practices specifically tailored to the needs of

the target population, reducing risk of default as well as the cost

associated with the transaction itself. With proper research and

planning, the RLF can supply a vast amount of capital to the

community without proving an undue strain on local budgets. 

10.

Designate a vacant-properties coordinator to use code

enforcement, provide incentives, and develop partnerships to

minimize and abate vacant properties.

One way to address issues associated with abandoned properties

and vacant land without passing new laws or ordinances is to

reorganize existing staff and revamp codes in a holistic fashion.

One city that successfully used this approach is San Diego.22 In

1993, faced with a growing number of abandoned homes and

boarded buildings, San Diego, under the leadership of the city

manager, established a task force to design an action plan for

addressing vacant properties. Representatives from lending institutions, title insurance companies, community groups, and real

estate and apartment owner associations joined the task force,

along with city staff from code compliance, the city attorney’s

office, housing, economic development, and the planning departments. The task force held several community meetings before

making a set of recommendations to the city council’s public services and safety committee. The recommendations included

appointing the first vacant-properties coordinator to spearhead

the city’s efforts.

From April 1995 through June 1997, the coordinator inventoried

more than 400 vacant and boarded single-family, multifamily, and

commercial structures and, during that same period, worked with

property owners and community groups to successfully rehabilitate more than half of those structures. The coordinator provided

owners with a self-help guide, information on matching rehabilitation grants, real estate and contractor

guidance, referrals to the county public

administrator for title and probate assistance, and volunteer demolition resources.

The coordinator also created a database to

track information, including property characteristics, ownership information, financial

encumbrances, tax delinquencies, and length

of time in the city’s inventory. She built

strong relationships across essential city

departments, especially with the city attorney’s code enforcement unit. As a result of

these close partnerships, the city revised its

vacant properties abatement ordinance to

require owners of vacant properties to submit a statement of intent and a rehabilitation

plan within 30 days of boarding up any

abandoned building. 

San Diego became one of the first cities in

California to consolidate its building, housing, and zoning inspectors into a neighborhood code compliance department (NCCD).

Because of its holistic management structure, NCCD was then reassigned to the

San Diego Police Department Business

Center, thus integrating vacant properties

69

Through persistent application of enforcement procedures,

San Diego’s vacant properties coordinator succeeded in persuading recalcitrant property owners to bring their properties up to code. Photos: Joseph Schilling
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

abatement with community-oriented policing strategies. In

February 2001, San Diego received a California Code

Enforcement Incentive Grant of $395,000 from the California

Department of Housing and Community Development to support these efforts.

Overall, the appointment of a vacant-properties coordinator to

facilitate the abatement and rehabilitation of vacant properties

represents a relatively easy step that municipalities can take to

strategically address this problem.

1 Susan F. Baer, The Case of a Milwaukee Business Improvement District: Politics

and Institutional Arrangements. Prepared on behalf of the 2001 Annual

Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 2001. 

2 For more information on the Times Square BID, see

http://www.timessquarebid.org/.

3 For more information on the Golden Triangle BIDs, see

http://www.gtbid.com/.

4 For more information on BID programs, see

http://www.yonkersecondev.com/businessimprovement.php or

http://www.downtownnorfolk.org/business_improvement_district.shtml.

5 For more information on the Smart Growth Priority Funding Areas Act,

see http://www.mdp.state.md.us/fundingact.htm.

6 Liz Hersh, Report on Home Equity Assurance to the Urban Issues Task Force of

10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania (Fall 2001),

http://www.10000friends.org/Web_Pages/Resources/

HomeEquityAssuranceReport10-01.doc.

7 Ibid.

8 For information on other Chicago-area HEAPs, see http://www.

swhomeequity.org/residents.htm.

9 See Liz Hersh, Report on Home Equity Assurance to the Urban Issues Task

Force of 10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania (Fall 2001),

http://www.10000friends.org/Web_Pages/Resources/

HomeEquityAssuranceReport10-01.doc.

10 See Frank S. Alexander, Renewing Public Assets for Community Development.

A Report for the Local Initiatives Support Coalition, October 1, 2000. 

11 For a variety of Web-based resources about reclaiming vacant properties

and abandoned buildings, see the National Vacant Properties Campaign at

http://vacantproperties.org/resources.html.

12 See Michael E. Porter, “The Competitive Advantage of the Inner City,”

Harvard Business Review, May-June 1995. 

13 Ibid. 

14 See Robert Weissbourd, The Market Potential of Inner-City Neighborhoods:

Filling the Information Gap (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution,

March 1, 1999).

15 For a discussion of the impacts of development practices on water quality,

see Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the

United States, by Dana Beach of the South Carolina Coastal Conservation

League for the Pew Oceans Commission:

http://www.pewoceans.org/reports/water_pollution_sprawl.pdf.

16 For more detailed information on the Localized Equivalent Area Drainage

(LEAD), see http://www.sannet.gov/stormwater/pdf/watershed.pdf.

17 For more information, see http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/.

18 For more information on low-impact development and uses in urban

areas, see http://www.lid-stormwater.net/.

19 Maupin, Miranda, and Theresa Wagner, Regional Facility vs. On-site

Development Regulations: Increasing Flexibility and Effectiveness in

Development Regulation Implementation (Seattle, Wash.: EPA, 2003),

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/natlstormwater03/22Maupin.pdf.

20 For links to a variety of reports supporting this statement, see the

American Public Transportation Association’s Transit Resource Guide at

http://www.apta.com/research/info/briefings/briefing_1.cfm. 

21 NOMA, “Mt. Vernon Square-Convention Center Metro Station,”

http://www.nomacenter.com/MetroMtVernonSquare_ConventionCenter.

htm.

22 Much of this section is adapted from an ICMA case study on San Diego’s

vacant property efforts, “The Revitalization of Vacant Properties: San

Diego Case Study” by Joseph Schilling of ICMA. The case study and 

others on vacant property issues can be found at http://icma.org/

vacantproperties.

70
Chapter 8

Provide a Variety of

Transportation Choices

As more communities adopt smart growth

principles, the benefits of linking transportation, the workplace, and housing are

becoming clearer. Even though most

Americans still use a personal automobile for

the majority of their trips, interest in improving

all forms of transportation, including mass

transit, biking, and walking, is on the rise. In a

2003 poll sponsored by the American

Automobile Association (AAA) and the

American Public Transportation Association,

71 percent of 1,032 randomly selected U.S.

adults stated that it was important to have both

good roads and viable alternatives to driving,1

including better support for bicycling and walking.2 In another poll, 81 percent of 1,003 adults

agreed that increased public investment in public transportation would strengthen the econPhoto: Dan Burden
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

omy, create jobs, and reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.

Both polls cited consistent support for investing in a variety of

transportation options.

Local officials, however, must balance the need for better transportation and related facilities in challenging financial environments. Transportation professionals are looking for creative policies that make the best use of existing transportation investments

and systems that maximize both transportation and economic

performance. This is where smart growth policies can provide an

array of solutions. For example, many localities have teamed with

transit agencies to adopt special planning and zoning districts for

transit stations in order to increase ridership and raise revenue. 

Transportation officials and localities are also beginning to seek

input from a wider array of community members. Among these

community members, unexpected alliances are forming to support better transportation and community development. The

Boone County Smart Growth Alliance in Missouri, a partnership

of environmental, community, and rural conservation

groups, grants Smart Growth Awards to recognize

development projects which take into account existing

transportation infrastructure and promote walkable

areas. Spurred by transportation problems, the business communities in Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago,

Illinois; and California’s Silicon Valley have led the

way for implementing smarter growth. As the policies

in this chapter suggest, both public- and private-sector

strategies offer opportunities to create a range of

transportation choices.

1.

Create programs and policies that support car sharing.

Car-sharing programs, which allow members to reserve a car

from a fleet of cars for short periods of time, are ideal for people

who need a car infrequently or for families who would not like to

own more than one car. The programs are typically operated by

private companies, such as Flexcar (www.flexcar.com) and ZipCar

(www.zipcar.com), although some successful programs, such as

San Francisco’s City CarShare, have been sponsored in part by

local governments. In areas with a high share of alternative commuters, businesses can also sponsor the practice so that employees who do not drive to work can share a car for lunchtime

errands or emergencies. The Commuter Challenge in the Seattle

area (www.commuterchallenge.org) and Zev-Net in California

(www.zevnet.org) are two programs that provide a fleet of cars for

day use to commuters who do not drive to work. Businesses and

local governments have also benefited from car-sharing programs

by avoiding the costs associated with maintaining a fleet of cars to

make client and service calls. 

Car sharing supports smart growth by reducing the number of vehicles on the road, even as it offers the advantages of car ownership

for people who do not want to own a car. Flexcar estimates that each

shared car replaces single ownership of up to six cars, which, by

extension, reduces the amount of parking needed and therefore

reduces potential development costs (since providing parking can

cost up to $10,000 per space).3 Car-sharing programs work best

where there is a high density of residents, a variety of transportation

options, and limited parking (e.g., university campuses). 

Car-sharing programs can be encouraged through local policies

that boost their appeal. For example, localities can reduce the

number of parking spaces required for higher-density residential

72

The T in Boston, Massachusetts.

Photo: Heather Deutsch
PROVIDE A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION CHOICES

projects in exchange for a highly visible, preferred parking space

for a shared car decorated with the car-sharing program’s logo.

Local governments can also assign certain public spaces, either on

or off street, for a car-sharing fleet. Regional authorities, such as

metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), can also recognize

car sharing in their transportation and air-quality programs. 

Car-sharing companies note that they measure success not by the

number of members, but by how frequently the cars are used.

The most successful programs, as found in Boston, Seattle, and

Washington, D.C., are those that have robust residential, business, and local government use. Since these users tend to need the

cars at different times of the day, the cars are in constant use. 

2.

Make sure transportation models and surveys accurately

reflect all modes of transportation.

Smart growth planning relies on forging good connections

between development projects and transportation networks.

Good planning relies on good predictions, and for predictions,

planners turn to survey data, trend analysis, and computer models. Unfortunately, the methods used in trend analysis and computer models often only estimate automobile-related outcomes

and design strategies. Thus, trips made on foot or by bicycle are

underestimated or discounted. As a result, conventional modeling

results tend to overestimate traffic and parking requirements for

smart growth projects. They also tend to underestimate the benefits that can accrue from improvements to the pedestrian, bicycle,

and transit system.

On a larger scale, transportation models are used to plan regional

transportation projects and to ensure compliance with air-quality

regulations. As with any form of modeling, a range of assumptions, such as 20-year employment forecasts and population statistics, is used to fill in knowledge gaps. Assumptions used in

transportation/air-quality models are based on typical development patterns, such as separated uses, a single mode of transportation (automobile), and a hierarchy of streets.4 Communities

trying to comply with pollution reductions face limited options

tied to the modeling and what it measures, such as carpooling or

vehicle fleet mixes, and often do not consider development patterns that encourage walking or biking. Because the transportation performance of smart growth decisions cannot be credited

under conventional models, local governments have fewer incentives to adopt smart growth policies.

To better determine the transportation performance of smart

growth projects and plans, models need to measure the effects of

transit, walking, and bicycling on air quality. A set of data is

emerging on the transportation and environmental performance

of transit-oriented development, community design, and supporting policies. Many localities would appreciate a system that gives

regulatory credit for the air quality benefits of smart growth, but

are unsure of how to account for the cumulative performance of

numerous small projects over time. The Clean Air Counts project

in Chicago (http://www.cleanaircounts.org) provides a good

example of how to account for the air-quality benefits of numerous small actions. In an effort to lower ozone levels, the city sponsors a web site that allows commercial painters and homeowners

to enter how many gallons of low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paints they have used. The city then tabulates the reduction in VOC levels compared with estimated levels of using conventional, higher-VOC paints. In the same manner, regions could

account for the environmental performance of transit-oriented

development (TOD) compared with the air-quality profile of a

PRACTICE TIP:

In July of 2003, Washington, D.C.,

began offering the SmartCommute

mortgage. The SmartCommute

Initiative recognizes that homeowners who do not rely on a car for

transportation have more financial

resources available for housing.

Potential homebuyers then can

qualify for a larger mortgage for

housing located near public transit.

“Transportation costs are the second largest expense after mortgage

or rent for many households, and

the SmartCommute Initiative is a

great way for people to reduce

those costs and increase their

home-buying power,” said Tim

Vogel, general manager of

Flexcar’s Washington, D.C., area

operations. Flexcar is offering

reduced membership fees and

hourly rates to homebuyers who

participate in SmartCommute.5

73
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

similar intensity of development under a conventional, nontransit-oriented plan.

3.

Consult early with emergency responders when developing

smart growth plans.

One critical component of a community’s transportation system is

effective emergency response. In some instances, fire, ambulance,

or police officials have expressed concerns with smart growth

neighborhood street designs because of concerns about access.

Specifically, they are worried that narrower streets, smaller intersections, or shorter curve radii will make turns difficult or will

impede staging activities—particularly as the equipment used gets

larger and larger. In some instances, communities have abandoned plans for smart growth road and transportation improvements, such as multiuse streets or engineering techniques to calm

traffic, after fire chiefs testified against the plans based on accessibility concerns.

Some emergency-response officials have pointed out that, from a

broader community-safety perspective, the wider streets and turns

actually produce more safety problems than they solve, since they

promote higher speeds and consequently more dangerous traffic

accidents. Others note that residential street designs, such as culde-sacs and limited access points for private communities, also

impede effective access. 

To achieve safer street networks, local governments should consult emergency responders during the design phase of a road

improvement project instead of at the end of the process. By

working together ahead of time, local governments and emergency responders can create designs that result in safer, more livable communities. For instance, by consulting with emergency

teams on fire equipment-staging requirements, road designers

can create midblock bulb-outs that provide adequate space for

staging, parking can be moved further back from crucial intersections, and shoulders and curbs can be designed for emergency

equipment use. In some communities, arguments have been effectively resolved by taking equipment out for real-life tests or by

driving emergency equipment through cones laid out to simulate

the design of an intersection or street.

The trend toward larger emergency response vehicles may be one

reason that responders support wider roads and turns. However, a

majority of calls to many fire departments are not for fires, but for

automobile accidents. Smart growth street designs reduce the frequency or severity of these incidents and thus relieve some of the

burdens on emergency responders. The Local Government

Commission has developed materials on the nexus between safer

streets and community design, which includes road design measures, visual cues to slow traffic such as plantings and signage, and

amenities to address pedestrian and bicycle safety.6 Thus, where

innovative designs are insufficient to meet smart-growth and

emergency-response needs, the solution may be to procure a

smaller truck to service smart growth areas. In fact, given the cost

savings associated with narrower streets and the potential for

reductions in the frequency and severity of accidents, purchasing

smaller equipment may be a savvy investment. 

4.

Change state insurance policies so that pay-as-you-drive insurance can be implemented.

Most automobile insurance rates are determined at the onset of

an annual policy and are set without regard to actual miles driven.

Once the policy is being paid, no consideration is given to the

74
PROVIDE A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION CHOICES

additional risk incurred with each additional mile driven. Since

insurance companies reduce rates for drivers who adopt other

types of risk-reduction measures, such as antilock brakes, it seems

reasonable that drivers should get credit for reducing risk by driving fewer miles. A pay-as-you-drive policy assigns insurance premiums based directly on how much a vehicle is driven. An insurer

can meter a car’s odometer to assess mileage, or require that a

policy holder pay an approximate amount and later pay the difference or get a refund if the actual mileage is less than estimated. In

2001, Texas passed legislation authorizing pay-as-you-go insurance, and several other states are now piloting policies. 

Barriers to wider use of pay-as-you-drive insurance policies

include reluctance by insurers to change practice, concerns about

drivers’ accountability, and impacts on drivers in rural areas.

Automobile insurance policies are governed by state rules; therefore, changing state insurance policies is the step to establishing

pay-as-you-drive alternatives. In crafting policies and regulations,

states should consider industry and consumer groups’ concerns to

ensure that mileage is accurately read and accounted for and that

different types of consumers (e.g., drivers in rural settings versus

drivers in urban settings) pay rates that are equitably tailored to

their driving habits and environments. For example, policies tailored to drivers in rural areas can be based on the average number

risks per mile in rural settings instead of the average number of

risks per average setting. 

5.

Consider transportation when developing rating systems for

green buildings and programs.

Over the past decade, interest in environmentally sensitive

“green” buildings has grown exponentially. The potential for

energy, water, and waste reduction has caught the attention of

both the public and private sectors. Many jurisdictions now use a

rating system for scoring a building’s environmental benefits in

development decisions, giving incentives and priority to green

projects. 

The U.S. Green Building Council has developed the Leadership

in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system to

assist developers and local governments in assessing a structure’s

“green-ness.” Early versions of the scoring system considered factors such as energy use, stormwater reduction, and use of green

building materials. While environmental benefits were related to

the structure itself, the system did not account for the energy, air

quality, and water attributes of the building’s location. Those taking a broader view of a building’s environmental impact pointed

out that green buildings situated in remote areas could actually

increase pollution since they were accessible only by driving long

distances and may require large surface parking lots. As use of

LEED scoring increased, observers began to think more about

the energy needed to transport goods, materials, and people to

and from the site.

As a result, the latest generation of LEED ratings evaluates the

environmental aspects of location. The LEED 2.0 scorecard

includes a section on sustainable sites, including urban redevelopment, reduced building footprint, and proximity to transit and

bicycle amenities. Extra points are given for “alternative transportation,” including parking policies, transit benefits, and car

sharing. Innovative building systems and smart growth strategies

are also highly rated. For example, points under the green building system are awarded for structures located in already-developed areas and reuse of brownfields sites. The state of Maryland

has translated its Smart Code into a LEED score. The Smart

75
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Codes program was developed to reduce code and permit barriers

to renovating older buildings in developed areas. By renovating

an existing building, for example, a builder can claim, at a minimum, credit for site selection (1 point), urban redevelopment (1

point), building reuse (3 points), and resource reuse (2 points), as

well as meeting the prerequisite for reducing the amount of waste

going to landfills.

6.

Transform park-and-ride lots into multiuse facilities.

Parking lots at transit stations are typically used only for parking.

However, these large, undeveloped spaces offer opportunities for

satisfying commuter needs without generating additional trips.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT),

more than two-thirds of all trips are non-commuting trips. In

addition, the fastest growing share of trips is nonwork-related

(e.g., shopping, recreation, and running errands). These smaller

trips could be reduced by incorporating small grocery stores, drycleaning businesses, and banks into the area around the transit

station parking lot so that people could complete their errands

during their commuting trip. In addition, the local video store

and library could supply drop-off boxes near the transit station.

Local governments could also set up a small kiosk or satellite

office to provide a small range of public services, such as answering tax inquiries, handling car registration renewals, and reporting city or county repair needs. A New Jersey Transit station in

Maplewood provides a concierge service to link commuters with

local service-providers and retailers so that everyday errands are

taken care of while passing through the train station to and from

work.7 The civic and retail development could be built within a

small development footprint, making it ideal for areas where

large-scale transit-oriented development could not be supported.

Depending on the size and intensity of the development, as well

as on prices charged for parking, the transit agency could gain

revenue from leasing commercial space. As with any retail

provider, customer-friendly location and hours are important

considerations. Some transit authorities, such as the Metropolitan

Transit Authority in New York City, have limited the types of

goods available for sale to avoid trash and food-waste problems

on trains and buses and in stations. In addition to retail, locating

child care at the station, such as that offered at some stations in

Washington State by Sound Transit, can offer a convenient alternative to those parents without cars.

Since development is likely to occur on land currently dedicated

to parking spots, resistance from commuters may arise at crowded

parking facilities. However, the spaces needed for shops and public services could be minimal. Moreover, the loss of a small number of parking spaces must be weighed against the economic, air,

and quality-of-life benefits that would likely occur as a result of

the station’s development. 

7.

Integrate goods movement and delivery into smart growth.

Growing congestion on our highways and at our ports has

spurred new thinking about goods movement, warehousing, and

distribution. Innovative ideas are particularly needed since the

volume of goods being delivered is also rising. Up until now,

freight planners and the carrier community (e.g., trucking and

delivery companies) have focused on a region’s transportation

network while overlooking complementary smart growth policies

to develop delivery improvements. In most cases, however,

improvements cannot be built anew from the ground up, so the

carrier community needs to work with planners and infrastructure

76
PROVIDE A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION CHOICES

managers to identify improvements in existing delivery systems.

In many cases, freight improvements can be found in redevelopment plans and by making better use of existing infrastructure

and community assets.

To make this a reality, carriers should be involved with localities

in cities with high freight traffic to ensure that local decisions on

transportation and land use are “freight friendly.” Since much of

our nation’s freight is handled through entry points and distribution centers (or hubs), location and efficient siting of these large

facilities are important. Cities that prohibit distribution centers

within their boundaries and business districts may be forcing

longer delivery routes by creating “freight sprawl.” 

Brownfields are often located along riverfronts, train lines, and

major highways. These sites can offer good opportunities for

locating distribution and consolidation centers. Freight planners

can partner with state and local brownfields programs to assess

the potential siting of freight handling and distribution centers on

these locations.

Once loads are prepared at a distribution center for delivery, creative management of curbside space, parking lots, and routes is

essential to facilitate efficient goods movement to retailers.

Typically, cities have managed curbsides for cars, street trees, and

parking meters. Increasingly, localities are finding it necessary to

address competition for space near curbs by delivery companies,

courier services, traffic, and commuter dropoff points. Given the

high competition for curbside space, cities should rethink allotment of this space. Cities can institute value pricing, which

assigns higher fees or parking meter rates during peak curbside

use hours. If meters are not available, cities can use permit parking or assign various times dedicated to freight deliveries. The

Foundation for Intermodal Research and Education’s brochure 

e-Freight: Metropolitan Implications (http://www.intermodal.org/

FIRE/e-freight_brochure.html) describes policies that can be

implemented to facilitate freight and deliveries. 

8.

Provide riders with customized transit information.

Far too often, marketing strategies for transit agencies begin and

end with printed posters and maps. While maps are essential for a

transit system, simply putting maps out in a display case does little to improve ridership. One alternative is to provide customized

information directly to potential riders, as successfully demonstrated by Portland, Oregon’s recent pilot project. This project

focused on delivering individualized information, including home

visits, to people who expressed interest in alternatives to their

automobiles. Those who got customized information reduced

their automobile trips by 8 percent. In Perth, Australia, delivering

customized information about travel alternatives directly to travelers decreased the amount they drove by 10-15 percent. 

Employers can also help. During the interview process, they can

provide prospective employees with maps showing the most

direct transit routes in the area. At this stage, the employee could

make a more informed decision that considers the job, housing,

and transportation all at once. This could be further enhanced if

employers team up with real estate professionals or the local

newspaper’s real estate section to match a variety of transportation alternatives with available housing. 

Technology is advancing to the point at which interactive kiosks

can provide customized information. These computerized kiosks

could be placed not only in transit stations, but also in other

secure locations, such as libraries and hotels, and at major events

and festivals. Interactive kiosks would also be valuable for comPRACTICE TIP:

The Alameda Corridor, a 20-mile

freight railway linking the Port of

Long Beach and Los Angeles to

downtown L.A., has helped to move

goods more efficiently while eliminating many community hazards

and improving the quality of life in

the communities it traverses. Two

hundred street-level railroad crossings will be eliminated, allowing

trains to travel more quickly and

easing traffic congestion. In addition, the Alameda Corridor

Transportation Authority has job

training and placement for hundreds of residents in adjacent communities. For more information

see:http://www.acta.org/home_

page.htm.

77
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

municating new routes in the event of unexpected route

changes or in case of emergencies. 

9.

Create comprehensive bicycling programs.

Even though the use of bicycles for commuting and running errands is increasing, the percentage of trips made

on bikes is still small. According to a 2003 poll sponsored

by the American League of Bicyclists, 52 percent of

Americans would like to bike more often. Three-quarters

of those polled said that providing safe bike paths and

other amenities would prompt them to bike more. 

A comprehensive bicycle program can create the conditions for bicycles to be a competitive transportation

option. A good plan considers all points in the trip,

including the destination point, and provides safe and

convenient routing and facilities. Bicycles are made still

more viable as transportation options when they are integrated

into the transportation system writ large—as a mode connected to

and coordinated with other modes. For instance, in some communities transit authorities place bike racks strategically for maximum use, both on buses and rail cars as well as in transit stations

with lockers and near connecting lines. In addition, recreational

trails are increasingly being viewed as transportation facilities as

well, designed intentionally to connect housing with services,

entertainment, and employment. 

One of the barriers to wider bicycle commuting is limited access

to showers and changing facilities. Some communities, such as

Denver, Colorado, and Iowa City, Iowa, require bicycle parking

for larger commercial buildings. In Sacramento, California,

developments with 100 or more employees may reduce their

parking requirement by providing shower and clothing locker

facilities for bicycle commuting employees. Other communities

have considered shower ordinances, but have been concerned

about costs to developers. King County, Washington, has provided grant monies for developers who build lockers and showers.

If a requirement for full facilities for each development project is

not feasible, developers can be encouraged to contribute to a

shared facility or work with a health club to provide special bike

commuter rates and packages. Portland, Oregon, sponsors a program called “Bike Central,” a network of facilities that provide

showers, lockers and bicycle racks to cyclists for a monthly fee of

$35 or a daily fee of $2.50.

Community bike programs are also growing. Tampa, Florida;

Portland, Oregon; Madison, Wisconsin; Missoula, Montana; and

Boulder, Colorado, offer bikes free and for charge in downtown

districts. The most well-known shared bicycle programs are

highly visible, with bikes painted a bright color, such as orange in

Tampa or yellow in Decatur, Georgia. Montgomery County,

Maryland, runs a borrow-a-bike program for employees who

work for Rock Springs Park-area businesses. 

78

Bike racks on buses

extend travel options

for cyclists.

Map of Boston, Massachusetts’

subway system.

Photo: Heather Deutsch

Photo: Dan Burden
PROVIDE A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION CHOICES

10.

Introduce value pricing.

Congestion pricing, variable-rate tolls, and high-occupancy toll

(or HOT) lanes are examples of value pricing for roadways. In

value-pricing programs, drivers who use roadways during peak

travel hours pay higher prices to use the roadway or certain lanes

designated for their use. The idea is to lessen traffic volume by

providing an incentive to shift travel times, increase carpooling,

seek alternative routes, or use other forms of transportation.

Debate over congestion pricing has been lively, and controversial,

for some time. Opponents of congestion pricing contend that

such fees place a relatively higher financial burden on those who

make lower incomes, and that the administrative costs of implementing and maintaining the system will outweigh the benefits.

Proponents argue that all users, regardless of their incomes, are

financially burdened by contending with congested roadways, and

that user fees are a fair way to allocate resources to transportation

infrastructure. Proponents also note that buses become a more

attractive transit option when they can reliably and quickly move

through uncongested lanes.

Variable pricing is now gaining wider acceptance given the need

for additional transportation investments and the toll of time lost

on congested roads. A recent General Accounting Office report

supporting the use of congestion pricing8 and the widely publicized congestion charge levied in London, England, has added

legitimacy to the concept. Growing support from a variety of

environmental and smart growth groups, combined with technological advances, is playing a crucial role in making congestion

pricing feasible and publicly accepted. 

An overall smart growth strategy should combine congestion

pricing with other policies to achieve better overall transportation

performance and a variety of transportation options. Variable-rate

pricing on roadways should be enhanced by an overall strategy

that links housing, jobs, and transportation. The goal of variablerate pricing is not toll collection, but to find a method to best use

the transportation system’s capacity. While traffic distribution is

one objective of congestion pricing, some roads may not be able

to handle, or should not handle, the shift. Planners should look

not only at the road in question, but also at the likely network of

alternative routes. 

Concern over the cost fairness of congestion pricing to lowerincome drivers is valid. Policies can be developed to build fairness

into the system. The equity of congestion pricing depends on the

how the collected revenues are invested and the availability of

travel alternatives. San Diego launched its Priced Express Lanes

in 1998 to see if variable pricing would reduce congestion. After

three years, the project now generates $1.2 million in annual revenues, about one-half of which is used to support transit service in

the corridor. In follow-up surveys, San Diego found support is

high across all income groups, with the lowest

income group expressing stronger support than

the highest income group (80 vs. 70 percent).9

The key in San Diego and London, and in all

value pricing, is the existence of viable alternatives. If drivers can choose alternate means of

transportation, then the charge is incurred at the

driver’s discretion; that is, the driver chooses to

pay for the convenience. Otherwise, the charge

simply becomes a tax. Where no alternatives

exist, revenue from value pricing can be used to

create alternatives.

PRACTICE TIP:

The League of American Bicyclists

sponsors the Bicycle Friendly

Community Campaign. The campaign is an awards program that

recognizes municipalities that

actively support bicycling. To see

which communities are bike friendly,

as well as the policies and amenities they have established,

see the website to learn more, http://

www.bicyclefriendlycommunity.org.

79

Photo: Dan Burden
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

1 Press release dated April 4, 2003, see http://www.apta.com/media/releases/

congestion.cfm.

2 Press release dated May 5, 2003, from the League of American Bicyclists.

Results from a poll conducted by Belden Russonello and Stewart (BRS)

and a press release from the Surface Transportation Policy Project dated

April 1, 2003; see http://www.transact.org/report.asp.

3 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, “Transportation Cost and Benefit

Analysis—Parking Costs” (updated June 2003), http://www.vtpi.org/tca/

tca0504.pdf.

4 For a more complete explanation of modeling, see “Inside the Black Box:

Making Transportation Models Work for Livable Communities” by

Edward Beimborn, Rob Kennedy, and William Schaefer at http://www.

environmentaldefense.org/documents/1859_InsideBlackBox.pdf. 

5 Source: SmartCommute, press release, 7/23/03.

6 Local Government Commission. For a summary of information, resources

and references, see http://www.lgc.org/freepub/PDF/Land_Use/focus/

traffic_safety.pdf

7 For more information, see http://www.maplewoodonline.com/concierge/

8 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03735t.pdf

9 United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway

Administration, “Value Pricing Pilot Program Project Descriptions”

(updated June 5, 2003); see http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/otps/

projdesc.htm.

80
Chapter 9 

Make Development 

Decisions Predictable, Fair,

and Cost-Effective

I

n the 1980s, if one wanted to see an example

of smart growth, he or she had only a handful of examples across the country from which

to choose. In the 1990s, however, the majority

of states had at least one smart growth project

to showcase. Today, there are hundreds of

smart growth projects across the nation that are

either complete or under construction.1 Smart

growth, as an investment opportunity, offers

developers a diverse range of investment-grade

options to choose from: brownfields, greyfields,

urban infills, transit-oriented projects, pedestrian-oriented projects, and traditional neighborhood development on greenfield sites.

Still, these efforts have not come easily to

fruition. For entrepreneurs, project execution

Photo: Joseph Schilling
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

has had its share of risk and uncertainty. For local governments,

the development process has required new laws, complex agreements, incentive packages, and personal sacrifice, and stakeholders who are committed to effecting change have oftentimes

clashed over the direction of development.

Many lessons have been learned from past successes and failures.

Public incentives are becoming more refined. Local approval

processes are becoming more streamlined. Developers have a better understanding of their product and how to attract end-users.

New solutions are extending beyond individual sites to include

districts and, in some cases, entire jurisdictions. Most importantly,

there is a heightened level of knowledge, education, and experience that exists for the benefit of all interested parties who seek to

provide new choices in how people can live, work, play, and protect the environment.

To continue receiving attention from investors, lenders, developers, and entrepreneurs, smart growth must be profitable.

While no real estate venture is without challenges, there exists a

higher degree of risk associated with smart growth development

than with single-use projects found within conventional development patterns. In this regard, there is still a lot the public sector can do to reduce barriers to development, level the playing

field, and encourage smarter growth. It is not enough to focus

attention on solutions at a specific site only to repeat the same

process for an adjacent parcel. To increase development and

reduce risk, local governments should act uniformly and consistently. Such a business practice can communicate a message to

developers that greater certainty and predictability exist in the

development process.

1.

Educate elected leaders and public officials about smart growth.

Many communities are discovering smart growth. In these places,

citizens expect their public officials to use smart growth to make

their towns and neighborhoods better, more livable places.

Prospects for smarter development are greatly enhanced when

public leaders can clearly articulate a strong vision about how and

where growth should occur. 

Elected and appointed leaders who know the importance of good

urban design, scale, diversity, and proper integration of new projects within the existing built environment can achieve higherquality growth that retains value over time. Understanding these

tools and learning how they encourage development require

training and education. To meet this challenge, a number of state

and national design centers around the country have emerged to

teach elected leaders and public officials about smart growth. 

The Maine Smart Growth Institute in Augusta brings together

local, regional, state, and federal officials with private-sector leaders to educate them about smart growth, land economics, marketplace economics, and existing growth and development patterns.

They receive training on smart growth concepts, design techniques, development principles, and development incentives, as

well as the tools to train others. The Florida Public Officials

Design Institute in Jupiter brings design and planning expertise

to elected officials at specific community sites. Operated by

Florida Atlantic University’s Catanese Center, the design institute

provides elected leaders with training and problem-specific tools,

design options for better development, and concrete suggestions

to implement smart growth. 

82
MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS PREDICTABLE, FAIR, AND COST-EFFECTIVE

At the national level, organizations are also training elected officials about smart growth. The Joint Center for Sustainable

Communities in Washington, D.C., helps local elected officials

build sustainable communities by providing technical assistance,

training, and educational forums. The Smart Growth Leadership

Institute trains state and local elected leaders on how to effectively create and implement smart growth initiatives. The Mayor’s

Institute on City Design teaches mayors advocacy for good design

through workshops and by recommending specific ways to make a

substantial impact on the quality of development in their cities

and towns. Graduates of these educational programs acquire the

knowledge and tools necessary to green-light projects that

become models for smart growth nationwide.

Every day, elected leaders are called on to assist with large building and development projects. They must approve special variances, negotiate exceptions, and communicate with their constituents about the positive impacts of these projects on their

communities. Every approved project serves as an opportunity to

add value to a community, to make it ordinary, or to make it

worse. Confusion about what is desired and what is finally

approved can send mixed messages to developers, who may simply opt to pursue another project where the process is easier and

more transparent. Such outcomes can be avoided through leadership training and education.

2.

Direct development along corridors to create stronger districts.

Corridors can function as multipurpose districts that unify a

diverse range of neighborhood uses with civic space, link town

centers, capitalize on existing infrastructure, and build stronger

commercial districts. High-density projects are more appropriately

located along corridors, where transportation capacity is greater.

Corridors should be planned to conveniently link town centers.

This can be accomplished by transit stops for passenger rail, bus,

or light rail along boulevards (intra-city) or avenues (inner-city).

Well-designed avenues with frequent intersections provide an

environment for area residents to walk or bike to local destination

nodes. As transportation modes increase, so does commuter access

to corridor employment. Transportation planning can position the

corridor as a job center to attract new business.

A primary benefit of corridor planning is to create an economic

district that is stronger than the sum of its component parts (i.e.,

the smaller individual centers). Merchants, especially national

retailers, select new markets based on local demographics, daytime population, transportation options, accessibility, parking,

and the prospect for retail synergy. Similarly, office markets are

best defined when office buildings are located close to one

another. Rather than scattering strip retail centers and office

buildings in a random fashion throughout a region, the corridor

extends development beyond individual centers while still focusing it within established markets. This type of growth reinforces

the viability of the individual centers, provides direction for new

development, and creates a stronger business district while being

more cost-effective for the region.

Over 30 years ago, Arlington County, Virginia, began a planning

process for the two-square-mile area encompassing the Rosslyn

and Ballston neighborhoods. Almost immediately, several development projects were initiated that set the course for higher-density projects and intense commercial uses on major streets that

linked five new Metro rail stations. Today, some sections of the

corridor are undergoing a second wave of development. Between

1999 and 2002, more than 2,500 apartments and condominiums

83
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

were constructed, and 1.5 million square feet of office space and

379,000 square feet of retail space have been built. The corridor

contributes more than 33 percent of the county’s real estate tax

revenue, yet encompasses less than 10 percent of the county’s land

area. Under typical suburban conditions, the corridor’s density

would be spread out over 14 square miles of open space. Such

concentration and synergy of uses have contributed to its remarkable market resiliency, despite a sagging economy. In 2002,

Arlington County’s Rosslyn-Ballston Metro Corridor Project was

honored with one of the U.S Environmental Protection Agency’s

(EPA) National Awards for Smart Growth.

3.

Create pattern books to streamline construction and enhance

project marketability.

A pattern book is an old concept

used by builders to establish the

basic form of buildings and to

provide key architectural elements and detail. Such books provide builders with a variety of

renderings and images of acceptable treatments necessary to build

a house. By varying the different

details and options, builders can

create an unlimited number of

housing patterns within a common architectural standard,

thereby providing each unit with its own unique flair. Such places,

both old and new, are highly desirable to homebuyers, and pattern books help ensure the quality and variety of new homes on

the market.

Developers are beginning to re-enlist pattern books to assist production builders in the construction of new housing units in

smart growth projects. This tool serves as an instruction book for

builders who traditionally work from their own standard subdivision home plans. Pattern books assist the builder in executing the

development’s concept as articulated in the project’s architectural

and design codes. Not only are pattern books advantageous in the

construction process, but developers are finding that they are also

a key component of the overall sales marketing program. Pattern

books allow for a greater number of housing variations to be created than is commonly found in conventional subdivisions. As a

result, consumers have more choices and often like the uniqueness of the product—aspects that distinguish pattern book neighborhoods from cookie-cutter subdivisions that have a small number of product types.

Pattern books are also becoming advantageous to developers

during the approval process, as new projects require more community input. Pattern books can help to communicate the proposed master plan’s character to the community and approving

officials, and can be used to assure them that “what they see is

what they’ll get.” Once general consensus has been reached on a

master plan, the pattern book serves as a means to implement it.

This process engages builders, developers, architects, and real

estate professionals in a more technical process. If prepared 

correctly, a pattern book can reduce misunderstandings between

homeowners, the developer, builders, and subcontractors.

Pattern books enable all participants to understand, embrace,

and build from a shared vision.2

84

This partial image of the RosslynBallston Metro Corridor illustrates

Arlington, Virginia’s success in linking several town centers to create a

larger district through corridor

planning.

Courtesy: Arlington County Department of Community Planning, Housing, and Development
MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS PREDICTABLE, FAIR, AND COST-EFFECTIVE

4.

Make zoning codes and other land development regulations

simple to use and easy to read.

When considering her options under most conventional zoning

codes, a developer may spend a great deal of time and expense

merely working out what activities or changes are permitted and

what are not. In some cases, the code may be written in complicated “legalese” that is difficult for developers (and citizens) to

decipher. In others, the code may contain confusing cross-references to other sections of the code, or permitted uses may be

spread out in long sections of repetitive text. Simplicity and ease

of use benefits all interested parties, because everyone can quickly

understand the rules of the game.

One reason for this complexity is that many codes are amended

several times over many decades, without undergoing a complete

update. In the case of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the code had

become, over time, “a collection of Post-It notes.” Among other

oddities, the old code had more than 125 different zoning districts, many of which were never used. After a four-year revision

process begun in 1997, the city council adopted many of the

changes proposed by city staff and an appointed task force. The

changes were dramatic. The code was slimmed down from 25

sections to only 10, unnecessary districts were eliminated, and a

Computerized Zoning Ordinance is now available and searchable

through the Web. The code now conforms closely to the zoning

map (see Policy 8), and the zoning map was updated to better

reflect current patterns of development. Due to the simplification

of administrative procedures, developers no longer have to go

through a cumbersome process at the board of zoning appeals.

Review time at the board of zoning appeals was reduced from an

average of 27 weeks per case in 1998 to 6 to 8 weeks in 2001.3

Several other localities have undergone similar revisions to make

their codes more user-friendly, including Detroit, Chicago, and

Honolulu. Simplicity is not an easy goal to achieve. After the city

of Dayton undertook an effort to update its code, one consultant

involved in the process noted that officials always had to be mindful of that goal, “because every time we thought of a new good

idea to include, that could increase complexity.”4

5.

Create a multimunicipal planning strategy to provide for development in rural markets while maintaining rural character.

Some states require their municipalities to create individual land

use plans that include all possible zoning uses within its jurisdiction. This challenge can be quite daunting, and for many rural

towns such legal requirements can have unintended consequences

that impact the rural character of a region. By zoning for all uses,

rural communities are placed in a precarious position. The

municipalities must designate the future removal of valuable open

space for noncompatible uses in rural areas (such as apartments,

offices, or industrial complexes), and, moreover, the nonrural uses

often diminish the spirit of the community. Under today’s planning measures, these nonrural uses are located in rural regions far

from existing centers. The location of such development requires

new infrastructure that is costly to implement and maintain.

Municipalities throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey are conPRACTICE TIP:

In Smart Growth Zoning Codes: A

Resource Guide, author Steve Tracy

provides several tips for writing

smart growth codes that are easy

to use.These include:

• Use straightforward language

and terms that are unambiguously defined and used consistently.

• Provide simple explanations that

avoid unnecessary complexity.

Try to keep each section of the

code self-contained and avoid

confusing cross references,

exceptions, and footnotes.

• Use tables or graphics to communicate zoning criteria and

development standards, and

avoid lengthy and repetitive

text....List setbacks for different

zones and building types in

tables rather than repeating the

same phrase over and over with

different numbers.5

85

A page from the pattern book for

Providence, a new traditional town

in Huntsville,Alabama, provides

examples of vernacular roofs and

eaves for bungalow models within

the development.

The Styles of Providence: Bungalow Vernacular, p. D-4, A Pattern Book for the Architecture of Providence,

2003, courtesy of PlaceMakers, LLC.
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

sidering other planning solutions as a means to enhance economic

development while preserving rural character.6 One tool is multimunicipal planning (multiplanning), which is being utilized as an

effective tool for rural regions to foster economic growth with

minimal impact on their rural value.

Multiplanning affords rural communities the opportunity to work

together to benefit from growth while protecting rural priorities.

The multiplanning strategy blunts some of the distortions introduced by the requirement to plan for all uses. It can reduce the

cost of infrastructure by concentrating high-intensity and dense

uses in fewer areas. It can also preserve agricultural land and

other critical open spaces across jurisdictions. From a regional

perspective, multiplanning facilitates tax revenue sharing, thus

reducing the need for municipalities to compete against one

another for commercial development. This allows municipalities

to conserve land while still benefiting from nearby commercial or

industrial development. Additionally, multiplanning can provide

for a consistent set of rules within the planning region, thereby

making development more attractive.

There are also a number of incentives for municipalities participating in multiplanning that vary according to state law. In

Pennsylvania, participating municipalities do not need to provide

for every type of possible use but may collectively spread those

uses over regional geographic areas. The municipalities can

receive state agency priority funding for such planning and implementation, and there is a greater likelihood that state agencies will

rely on multiplanning to make funding and permitting decisions. 

To the benefit of developers and investors, multiplanning outlines

where the designated growth areas are for an entire region and

where rural growth boundaries begin. It saves the developer and

investor from fighting individual development battles in each

municipality in the multiplan. It also ensures adequate infrastructure to sustain development where it is deemed appropriate.

6.

Establish a state- or regional-level “smart growth cabinet.”

Development patterns and practices are influenced by many government actions, including transportation projects, infrastructure

decisions, housing policies, economic development programs, and

environmental protection strategies. Without clear direction and

coordination, these agencies, policies, and programs can send contradictory messages to the development market. This can be especially true for smart growth development given that existing zoning

codes, regulations, and ordinances do not accommodate smart

growth practices as a matter of course. Currently, the approval

process for smart growth development requires variances and

intradepartmental agreement. To make smart growth innovation

easier than, and more competitive with, conventional development,

states have created “cabinets” that are made up of state-level cabinet members and top executives of agencies and departments. 

States that have smart growth cabinets serve various purposes and

have numerous goals; yet, they do have commonalities. In some

form or another, these cabinets set smart growth policy, coordinate interdepartmental procedures and programs, review programs for adherence to smart growth principles, and resolve conflicts among agencies and departments in the implementation

process. Many of these states have adopted smart growth principles for guidance. It is common to find these cabinets focusing on

comprehensive state development programs in addition to the specific interests of the state, such as brownfields redevelopment, the

strengthening of existing centers, economic development, transportation and mobility, pollution, and open space conservation.

86
MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS PREDICTABLE, FAIR, AND COST-EFFECTIVE

Regardless of political party or geographic location, governors are

looking at smart growth to help conserve land and fiscal

resources, reduce pollution, and plan for growth. Smart growth

“cabinets” can assist by creating consistent investment and incentive policies at the state level, monitoring state progress in development and conservation, assisting local governments in their

smart growth efforts, streamlining statewide implementation, and

removing barriers to better growth.

7.

Create an “incentives expert” for developers and businesses

when an area has been designated for development/

redevelopment.

Many developers are not aware of all the available incentives

when considering a smart growth project. An incentives expert

guides developers though the existing toolkit, recommending

incentive options, explaining programs, and providing other

advice. If not a specifically created position, this role could be fulfilled by a knowledgeable municipal planner or economic- or

community-development director.

Making the development process fair and predictable for developers does not require sophisticated technology but can be accomplished by using available resources more effectively and by minimizing obstacles. The existence of incentives in an area targeted

for development welcomes developers. However, even when valuable incentive programs exist, developers often have difficulty

navigating the complex maze of paperwork and understanding eligibility requirements.

One way to assist the development process for entrepreneurs is to

designate a professional for all inquiries and marketing of incentives. This individual may be assigned to active developers or

specifically identified development sites or may serve as a liaison to investors who are considering developing properties that

the town desires to have rebuilt.

The incentive expert should be

well versed in the incentives, the

community’s strengths, and the

type of development desired.

Empire State Development of

New York provides businesses

and investors with such information for new projects and relocating businesses. They also assist

decision makers with bond programs, tax and finance incentives,

and energy-saving measures, as

well as opportunities in different

incentive zones.7 A local government liaison should also possess a

list of sites qualified to receive

incentives and market those sites

accordingly.

Developers perform a complex

series of calculations before committing to a project. Some of the

factors they consider include

financing, market opportunities,

ease of entry, timing, and workforce availability. Although a

town cannot control many of

PRACTICE TIP:

A number of states (e.g., Minnesota, Wisconsin, Kentucky, North

Dakota, and Utah) have adopted smart growth initiatives. In addition to their own state initiatives, Colorado, New Jersey, and

Maryland have also established state smart growth offices.To date,

only Maryland has had a state-level cabinet position for its smart

growth executive. The following seven states and one regional

authority have cabinets that pursue smart growth policies:

Illinois Balanced Growth Cabinet

Office of the Governor

http://www.state.il.us/state/balanced/cabinet.htm 

Maine Smart Growth Coordinating Committee 

Maine State Planning Office

http://www.state.me.us/spo/landuse/tfandcomm/sgcc/index/php 

Maryland Smart Growth Subcabinet 

Maryland Governor’s Office of Smart Growth 

http://www.smartgrowth.state.md.us/

Massachusetts Commonwealth Development Coordinating Council

Office of the Governor

http://mass.gov

Michigan Land Use Leadership Council 

Department of Environmental Quality Environmental Science 

& Service

http://www.michiganlanduse.org/

New Jersey Smart Growth Policy Council

Office of Smart Growth, New Jersey Dept. of Community Affairs 

http://www.nj.gov/dca/osg/commissions/sgpc.shtml

Pennsylvania Interagency Land Use Team

Governor’s Center for Local Government Services 

Department of Community and Economic Development

http://www.landuseinpa.org 

Great Lakes Sustainable Land Use Commission

http://www.glc.org/bridges/

87
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

these factors, it may have already created incentives to reduce the

amount of hurdles. An incentives expert can clearly communicate

with potential investors and streamline the incentive process,

thereby increasing the community’s chances of attracting the type

of development it wants.8

8.

Implement geographic information system-based planning

into the development process.

Geographic information systems (GIS) are already impacting

planning and development review. When used creatively, GIS can

speed up the development review process and measure characteristics such as walkability and mix of uses. 

GIS are a computer-based tool for mapping and analyzing large

amounts of datasets, including land use, employment, transportation, and environmental layers. GIS can be used to quickly analyze the environmental characteristics of any potential building

site. Some of these characteristics may include soil type, aquifer

capacity, steep slopes, floodplains, wetlands, buffer zones, and

view sheds. The accessibility of a site to transportation and utility

infrastructure may be evaluated. Urban and transportation planners aggregate these and other measurements to develop projections for the future requirements and impacts of various land uses.

Planning and zoning departments around the U.S. are reviewing

an increasing number of development proposals with fewer staff

and resources. GIS can help ease this burden by providing the

means to quickly and easily evaluate plan reviews. Timely reviews

provide an attractive business climate for developers because of

the increased certainty in the development review process. The

city of San Diego invested heavily in GIS (Process 2000) in order

to streamline their development review process. On average,

waiting times for certain permits have been reduced by as much

as nine months.9

Map Milwaukee combines GIS with public data to provide comprehensive information about site location, zoning, parcel data,

and property ownership. The maps can be useful to Milwaukee

developers by providing information for the planning and permitting of new and remodeled buildings. A developer is able to

determine, among other things, if a parcel is located in a business

improvement district or a targeted investment neighborhood or if

it is an improved property that is for sale.

To further advance smart growth, GIS can add certainty to—and

can accelerate—the approval process. Localities can set and make

public community-specific development standards similar to the

smart growth scorecards in use around the country (see Principle

8, Policy 5). GIS provide a way to objectively measure a development’s performance on many measures, such as walkability and

access to transit or open space, thus removing some of the uncertainty from the process. In this way, speedy reviews can be combined with development performance measures, and developers

have a clearer idea as to the standards that must be met, how they

will be judged, and, potentially, what benefits come with different

levels of excellence. 

9.

Streamline brownfield redevelopment approval processes.

Many barriers have traditionally discouraged investment in contaminated properties. Prospective property developers and owners often choose to develop uncontaminated greenfields rather

than risk liability, costs of cleanup, and uncertainty associated

with redeveloping brownfield properties. Since the 1990s, a

growing understanding of the potential benefits of brownfield

PRACTICE TIP:

• Provide your contact person with

the tools necessary to launch a

successful project.

• Create a fact sheet about the

incentive programs.

• Include relevant names and

phone numbers of town officials,

local lenders, and local agencies,

as well as contact information

for relevant state or other officials.

• Create a notebook that includes

all documents previously used

for a variety of successful projects as samples of accurate

preparation.

• Develop a list of the most common, and most expensive, mistakes that developers have made.

88
MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS PREDICTABLE, FAIR, AND COST-EFFECTIVE

redevelopment to surrounding communities and regions has led

policy makers to create incentives for brownfield redevelopment.

In particular, state-initiated voluntary cleanup programs (VCPs)

have played an important role. Almost every state has enacted

some type of VCP to encourage owners, developers, and municipalities to initiate site cleanups. In addition, many municipalities

have adopted their own brownfields redevelopment incentives.

States and municipalities often combine incentives, such as financial assistance, reduced liability, and other measures. Streamlined

approval processes, which can be accomplished by incorporating

simplified, more efficient administrative procedures and by

encouraging community participation, may be the next frontier.10

Milwaukee, a city with a highly industrial past and home to many

brownfields properties, is targeting its brownfields redevelopment

in four state-designated development zones. Key components of

their revitalization program include: 

• Predevelopment roundtables for large projects where public

agencies and developers identify potential hurdles and preempt

regulatory delays 

• Arranging for land assembly and acting as a liaison to 

state regulators

• A city-run development center that provides a single point of

contact and assistance for obtaining construction and 

building permits.11

Agencies can also streamline approval by setting specific review

timelines to ensure that the review of an application will be complete within a certain number of days after the time of submission. In addition, public entities can also facilitate redevelopment

by providing informational support, low-cost consulting, technical assistance, GIS analysis, and records of past uses. These procedures and forms of administrative support reduce delays in

brownfield cleanup, clarify requirements, and provide information to prospective developers and property owners. They are

important in addressing critical barriers to redevelopment, such

as high transaction costs. The relatively inexpensive state assistance programs associated with reducing decision-making costs

may actually have more impact than far more expensive financial

subsidies that are intended to increase returns or, in comparison

to risk-based standards, that may raise environmental justice or

health concerns.12

10.

Create investment funds for smart growth projects.

A growing number of developers and investors who have completed smart growth projects are looking for additional opportunities. Because of their experience, investors are becoming more

knowledgeable in identifying the components of a smart growth

project. Their experience also provides developers with a solid

understanding of what to expect in the development process. In

short, smart growth is becoming more predictable for the seasoned real estate professional. These investors are now poised to

identify, through smart growth investment funds, opportunities in

bulk that produce a “double bottom line”—one that is profitable

to investors and supports the goals of smart growth. 

CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the U.S., has two

smart growth programs totaling $300 million. The Northern

California Urban Infill Investment Program has a $100 million

equity fund that increased to $200 million the year it was funded.

Bridge Housing Corporation and RREEF, two real estate firms,

each manage $100 million of the fund’s allocation. CalPERS also

has a similar fund, managed by CommonWealth Partners, LLC,

89
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

valued at $100 million dollars aimed at Southern California. Both

programs apply smart growth investment strategies that focus on

new and rehabilitative construction.13 

American Ventures, a Coral Gables, Florida-based investment firm,

has recently launched two real estate investment funds targeting

urban neighborhoods in Miami and Albuquerque, N.M. Fund

managers will have $50 million to $100 million to invest for each

city. The funds will target mixed-use projects within the central

business districts. Albuquerque and Miami were selected because of

the pro-development attitude of elected officials and the desire of

each to improve neglected communities. The initiative is expected

to attract investment from private foundations committed to a mission of revitalizing depressed communities. The funds will work

with state pension and permanent funds and federal banks and

S&Ls subject to the Community Reinvestment Act.

1 Robert Steutiville, “New Urban Projects on a Neighborhood Scale in the

United States,” New Urban News 7, no. 8 (2002).

2 Urban Design Associates, “Pattern Books and Design Guidelines” (May

14, 2003), 1: http://www.urbandesignassociates.com/servicespattern.html 

3 Proceedings of “Reforming Codes, Revitalizing Communities: An ICMA

Regional Forum on Revising Codes to Achieve Smart Growth”

(Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association,

forthcoming).

4 Ibid.

5 Steve Tracy, Smart Growth Zoning Codes: A Resource Guide (Sacramento:

Local Government Commission, 2003).

6 Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act 247 of 1968; the

“Growing Smarter” Amendments, Acts 67 & 68, 2000; and New Jersey

Municipal Land Use Law, Section 40:55D-77.

7 For details, see http://www.empire.state.ny.us/nysdc/.

8 Much of this section is adapted from Terry Richman, “Is Your Town

Developer Friendly?”

http://www.cardi.cornell.edu/cd_toolbox_2/tools/dev_friendly_town.cfm.

Reprinted from “Towns & Topics,” Association of Towns of State of New

York (September-October, 2002). 

9 George Arimes, “Doing the Job in Double Time,” Planning (March 1997).

10 For more information, see the U.S. EPA report Redevelopment: Economic

Engine and Environmental Opportunity. An electronic version of the report

and information for ordering a hardcopy can be found at

http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth.

11 Angela E. Vitulli, Charlotte Dougherty, and Dan Hutch, “Urban

Competitive Advantage and Brownfields Redevelopment,” Brownfields

2002 Conference Proceedings (Charlotte, NC, November 13-15, 2002),

http://www.brownfields2002.org/proceedings2000/5-07v.pdf.

12 Peter B. Meyer, “Approach to Brownfield Regeneration: The Relative

Value of Financial Incentives, Relaxed Mitigation Standards and

Regulatory Certainty” (working paper; Louisville, KY: Center for

Environmental Policy and Management, University of Louisville, 2000).

13 The CalPERS Web site at http://www.calpers.ca.gov/ details both funds

and their “Smart Growth” investment strategy.

FINANCE TIP:

A number of lending sources have

funding initiatives for smart growth

projects that help create livable

communities, support transportation options, and foster sustainable

patterns of land use. Other funders

support affordable housing and

community development, specialize

in programs that support lowincome and minority communities,

or fund the protection of open

space. These funders help make

development decisions more predictable by providing a stream of

capital to developers and communities when conventional funding

sources cannot be relied upon. See

Appendix B for a comprehensive

directory of lenders and foundations that have supported, or can be

used to support, smart growth.

90
Chapter 10 

Encourage Community and

Stakeholder Collaboration in

Development Decisions 

The current development process satisfies

neither citizens nor the development

community, even though process changes that

can benefit both parties can be identified by

collaborating on development decisions. After

undergoing a lengthy, exhaustive visioning

process, citizens can become frustrated and disillusioned when their expectations for outlined

plans, codes, and, ultimately, development are

not met. Like the development community, the

overall community benefits from a clear, open,

and predictable development process. 

Lessons on how to better engage stakeholders

are coming to light as more communities adopt

smart growth. First, communities need to be

engaged at or near the beginning of the

Photo: Chuck Bohl
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

process. When community members are brought in late, the

process and development plans are not likely to be inclusive and,

subsequently, are viewed by the community with distrust. In addition, the plans may be so far along in the design process that constructive suggestions cannot be easily integrated at a later stage.

Second, new tools to envision a project’s impact and to tap into

stakeholders’ creativity are constantly being developed. State-ofthe-art tools and technologies, such as a visual-preference survey

or a computer tool to illustrate a proposed project in its setting,

have enabled developers to create interactive, virtual models of

proposed plans for development. Such tools help developers create design details that are beneficial to both the community and

the project.

Providing community members with user-friendly information on

plans and projects is also important. Media outlets, such as local

newspapers and news stations, are skilled at delivering community-related information to a diverse audience, and local colleges

and businesses are also key resources to conveying information

pertinent to the community planning process. 

Finally, involving the full range of stakeholders in the development process, though difficult, is one of the best ways to ensure

that growth will result in a more livable, more vibrant community

that accurately reflects local needs and values. The policies presented below are intended to assist in engaging all stakeholders in

the development process. 

1.

Use third-party groups to make sure a range of stakeholder

views is expressed.

Often, the development approval process results in a heated

exchange between the developer and representatives of adjacent

neighborhoods. Consequently, the only issues presented to decision officials tend to underscore potential negative impacts to

neighboring properties and to reiterate what the developer is willing to build. Because development decisions rarely affect the

neighboring community or builder only, introducing other comments, or third-party testimonies, on the potential positive and

negative impacts can shape a better vision for the final project.

For example, a local chamber of commerce may offer comments

on a housing and jobs mix that other stakeholders feel uncomfortable addressing due to other priority areas or lack of expertise.

Third-party analysis and testimony have typically advocated

affordable housing. In recent years, however, third-party testimonies have commonly supported compact development, a wider

range of density, and mixed uses. Third-party views are typically

useful for projects that may be viewed with skepticism by neighborhood residents (e.g., where commercial uses or apartments are

to be introduced in residential neighborhoods).

To be credible, third-party groups need to rooted in the community and must represent an array of community interests. For

example, in the San Francisco Bay area, the Transportation and

Land Use Coalition is made up of 90 local organizations that support better transportation, affordable housing, and participatory

community design. In addition to including environmental and

transportation advocates, the coalition includes church officials

and representatives of the elderly. This group has expertise in

transportation and jobs/housing links. 

92
ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATION IN DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS 

Third-party groups

also need to establish

project criteria for a

development so that

the group’s endorsement is not seen as

arbitrary and subjective. For example, the Washington Smart

Growth Alliance in the District of Columbia sponsors a Smart

Growth Recognition Program. The team, made up of developer,

civic, and environmental interests, reviews commercial and residential development proposals and writes letters of support and

testimony if a project meets the program’s criteria. Among other

requirements, the planned development must be located in or

adjacent to developed areas, have sufficient density, provide transportation options, and generate benefits for the surrounding area.1

2.

Use nonprofit groups as smart growth consultants.

Bringing together all of the stakeholders in the development

process can be a large undertaking. Many communities find that

they do not have inhouse planning expertise or the funds to hire a

consultant. Increasingly, smart growth groups, which typically

comprise supporters who have a variety of backgrounds (e.g.,

transportation, zoning, watershed protection, etc.), are filling this

gap by offering their services. 

The American Farmland Trust, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit

that advocates farmland preservation, is one leader in this field. Its

Community Farmland Protection Consulting Services group

helps neighborhoods and towns estimate the costs of services for

various development patterns, identify valuable resource lands,

and engage the public in planning and creating purchase-ofdevelopment rights.2 To find similar organizations, communities

can consult state and local smart growth groups, watershed-protection organizations, and land conservancies to learn about who

may have expertise in planning, leading workshops, or conducting

site analyses. 

Universities can also provide valuable consulting services. The

state of Delaware tapped the University of Delaware’s Institute for

Public Administration to help smaller communities develop comprehensive plans under the state’s “Livable Delaware” initiative. 

A common thread among smart growth organizations that provide consulting services is the ability to connect core areas of

expertise, such as farmland protection or schools, with related disciplines to develop comprehensive plans for communities and

regions. Nonprofit organizations can provide services or help 

a community focus on key growth and planning needs prior to

hiring a consultant.

3.

Use a “kick the tires” trip to take local government officials

and residents to visit smart growth communities.

Often, local officials and neighborhood activists have little experience or previous exposure to smart growth. While graphics and

architectural renderings can give a rough picture of what projects

look like, a better way to demonstrate smart growth’s potential is

to actually walk through a traditional neighborhood development

or completed smart growth project.

The idea of taking key stakeholders to view actual projects is not

new. The Marshall Fund, for example, sponsors exchange trips so

that U.S. and European delegations can view best practices in

environmental and transportation projects. A smart growth variaPRACTICE TIP:

The nonprofit National Charrette

Institute (NCI) was founded in

2001 to help communities develop

more livable communities through

collaborative planning processes.

The French word “charrette”

means “little cart” and is used to

describe the final, intense work

effort expended by art and architecture students to meet a project

deadline. The term has now evolved

to describe a rigorous and inclusive

process that produces the strategies

and implementation documents for

complex and difficult design and

planning projects. Charrettes

include intense sessions held over

several consecutive days. The product is a consensus plan on how a

community should develop and

grow. NCI was formed to foster

broader use of holistic, collaborative planning processes in community design. For more about NCI

and what they offer, see

http://www.charretteinstitute.org/.

93

Photo: Dover, Kohl & Partners
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

tion of exchange programs is a great way to let local officials see

how density, design, and transportation all work together in cities

that have implemented smart growth. An actual project can

debunk common myths and misunderstandings about traffic,

parking, and public services. To be successful, a smart growth tour

organizer will include a presentation of supporting growth principles and policies, interviews with various stakeholders, and any

“lessons learned” to inform the planning and implementation of

similar projects.

To understand the real-world implications of smart growth, representatives from a community do not need to travel abroad but

can find model projects in their own region. A first step in finding

these projects is to look at awards or smart growth certification

programs, such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)

smart growth awards. Development organizations, such as the

Urban Land Institute and the Congress for New Urbanism, also

sponsor awards for smart growth design and transportation. The

American Planning Association has added a special smart growth

category to its list of annual awards. 

4.

Establish context-sensitive design training courses that focus

on community-involvement strategies for traffic engineers.

Context-sensitive design (CSD) is defined as a collaborative,

interdisciplinary approach that involves all stakeholders in developing transportation facilities that support a range of community

needs. In addition to promoting safety and mobility, this approach

considers a community’s scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources. CSD arose from the recognition that transportation systems and their facilities affect a wider area than a

road or rail line’s immediate surroundings. Transportation officials also recognize that existing facilities are a prime focus for

improving communities as well as transportation networks. 

However, balancing transportation and community needs is certain to pose trade-offs. Transportation engineers will find themselves in the unfamiliar territory of considering community building, historic preservation, and public art. Even where transportation officials are well versed in community design, they may need

help conveying transportation needs to a nontechnical audience

or in translating a wide array of transportation needs into traditionally inflexible design standards.

To ease this process, communities can develop an outreach program that engages transportation engineers and officials with

neighborhood residents, landscape architects, and community

development representatives to develop collaborative design

strategies specifically geared to transportation facilities. The

Project for Public Spaces (PPS) in New York City has developed

an excellent three-day course on engaging communities for CSD.

For more information, see http://www.pps.org.

5.

Use quick-response teams to gain approvals for smart growth

developments.

Newspapers from around the country are filled with stories on how

cities are coming back, boosted by housing, retail, and entertainment districts. However, proposing an infill or redevelopment project can be challenging. Outdated regulations, poor maps, design

challenges, and overlapping zoning codes are some of the barriers

faced by developers who may ultimately consider greenfield development an easier alternative. To level the development playing

field, localities and states have instituted multidisciplinary quickresponse teams to help guide proposals through the application

PRACTICE TIP:

In 1999, researchers from

Kalamazoo College brought a

group of community leaders from

the Kalamazoo, Michigan, region on

a study trip to Portland, Oregon, to

study growth management policies

and issues. The trip kicked off a

year-long project called “Convening

Our Community” that built the

political will to solve a number of

previously intractable and contentious land use issues in western

Michigan.3

94
ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATION IN DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS 

process. To ensure that these teams don’t bypass the stakeholder

involvement process, choosing a representative team is important. 

Oregon’s Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program is a joint project between the Departments of

Transportation and Land Conservation and Development. A

major component is the Quick Response Program, which

addresses community requests with planning and design services

to implement smart growth goals, plans, and projects—usually

within two weeks. In response to local requests, developers, property owners, local/state officials, and affected stakeholders come

together to review development proposals, develop innovative

design solutions, and overcome regulatory obstacles to land use,

transportation, and design issues. The program also provides economic and market-feasibility analysis. The state contracts with

experienced design and planning firms to deliver plans, analyses,

and recommendations for code reform. 

In one example a community was dissatisfied with a redevelopment plan that would create a one-story retail center with surface

parking. With the Quick Response team’s assistance, and in coordination with the city, the block was transformed into a mixed-use

project with street-level retail and upper-story condominiums and

townhomes with underground parking. The rear of the building

is lined with two-story townhomes, in response to the community’s concern that the project blend in with the scale of the adjacent historic Irvington neighborhood.4

6.

Conduct place audits to determine barriers and opportunities

for smart growth.

Many communities spend a lot of time trying to predict the

impacts of individual development projects without first understanding how their neighborhood works. A place, or community,

audit can help assess community functions by analyzing the combination of small details that affect common concerns like traffic,

recreational space, housing, and safety. While smart-growth or

zoning-code audits focus specifically on codes and regulations, a

place audit focuses on how community assets, regulations, and the

built environment relate to each other. A community-development organization may want to sponsor a neighborhood audit as a

community-building activity and as a means to get neighbors

more involved in the planning process.

One type of place audit is a walking audit. Geared toward looking

at the quality of the pedestrian environment, a walking audit looks

at the details of sidewalk width, curb heights, corners, and crosswalks. A place audit can look at these elements as well as the way

that parks, buildings, and streets are constructed within a neighborhood. This helps residents understand the factors and design variations that affect traffic speeds, pedestrian safety, and design needs. 

Although every place audit is a little different, each usually

includes the following key elements: 

• A local presenter who describes a particular local problem 

or situation

• A visual introduction to community design

• A walk in the community to identify good and bad conditions

• A discussion of people’s observations on the walk

• Agreement on possible action items and/or 

proposed improvements.5

A community can develop other types of neighborhood audits during a planning process. For example, when a community is considering alternative locations for senior housing, stakeholders should

95
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

conduct a special community audit to consider how the new residents will get around in their new neighborhood. The walk should

pose questions on features that many younger community members take for granted. Are there curb cuts? Are the signs printed

and located so that elderly persons can easily find their way? Are

the services and goods purchased by senior citizens located nearby?

While audits can be devised to address an array of community

issues, their key feature is getting neighbors out to look at actual

conditions and problems. Basing the discussion in the neighborhood has a way of putting aside philosophical, rhetorical, or ideological arguments in favor of a more practical, solution-based discussion. Making the physical neighborhood the context can

sometimes go a long way toward finding agreement among 

disparate viewpoints.

7.

Develop community indicators to make sure that development

is meeting community goals.

Indicators are identifiable measures that can be used to assess

your community’s health. Many financial, transportation, and

census indicators are already widely collected and used by localities as benchmarks, such as income, home-ownership rates, and

miles of bicycle trails. However, these common measures might

not tell the entire story of how a community is reaching wider,

long-term goals. For example, a community might have a high

home-ownership rate, but may still be struggling to meet its

housing goals for city or service-industry employees. Using this

example, a community may want to track other housing statistics,

such as the percentage of employees who live outside of the jurisdiction or the percentage of apartments that have been converted

to condominiums.

Jurisdictions with such indicator projects include Chapel Hill,

North Carolina; Boulder County, Colorado; and Santa Barbara,

California. Each uses different types of indicators that were developed with public participation.

Indicators should come from reliable data sources, measure outcomes, and be easily understood. 

Be prepared to support your measurements with background

material and context. Tracking indicators means a community

will, at some point, likely face poor results or declines in performance. When developing indicators, a community should think

about the range of likely outcomes (both good and not so good),

those factors that are under its control, and the community’s ability to respond and correct course. The objective of an indicators

project is to understand the factors that are valuable to the community and use the information to inform development decisions. 

A wide range of stakeholders should be consulted when choosing

the appropriate indicators and how those indicators are worded in

a statement. For example, mud and sediment washing into streams

and lakes is a common water-quality problem. The decision to

word the water-quality indicator as “sediment coming from construction sites” could unfairly single out certain stakeholders (e.g.,

local homebuilders), while preventing the community from identifying and addressing other sources of the problem.

8.

Use color-coded maps to establish a planning and zoning

framework for future planning decisions.

It may sound impossible, but several communities have boiled

down their land-use plans to one piece of paper. For stakeholder

involvement, maps can be the best way to communicate informaPRACTICE TIP:

The Baltimore Neighborhood

Indicators Alliance has used census

data and information from the cityplanning office to develop a set of

indicators around housing and community development, children’s

health, safety, workforce development, economic development, the

urban environment, transit, education, and youth. See http://www.

bnia.org for more information.

96

Photo: Heather Deutsch
ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATION IN DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS 

tion to people with diverse backgrounds and technical abilities.

Graphics or color-coded maps can serve as the single reference

for all of the stakeholders involved. 

Planning is a complex process that typically results in at least one

large document spelling out the land-use history of an area, future

trends, legal requirements, and design details. As useful as these

documents are, they tend to be ineffective when a quick reference

or succinct planning statement is needed. That’s when maps can

be incredibly useful in spelling out planning areas, current zoning, or a visual representation of completed projects. Maps are

also extremely useful for depicting where a community wishes to

direct development or, conversely, for pinpointing which areas are

designated for low-density or open space. 

Arlington County, Virginia, outside Washington, D.C., developed

a general land use plan (GLUP) in the 1960s as its Metro rail stations were being planned. The county wanted to achieve two goals

at once: direct high-density development to transit corridors and

preserve older, lower-density neighborhoods. To get citizen

approval for the high-density development, the county instituted

“bull’s-eye” zoning to taper densities down toward the neighborhoods. It also drew boundaries to separate the older neighborhoods from the denser redevelopment areas. The resulting GLUP

map, superimposed over the county’s street network, shows this

planning nicely. Footnotes in the plan are used to denote future

planning exercises, special exceptions, and other details. 

In Austin, Texas, stakeholders developed a similar but slightly different strategy using what they call a future land use map

(FLUM) to guide future development decisions. The FLUM is

developed during the neighborhood-planning process.

Participants first look at a map showing current uses, current zoning, and the neighborhood’s boundary lines. They then think

about what they would like to see in the future within the community boundaries. The city then overlays the zoning map with

the FLUM to demarcate where zoning changes, community

investments, or other process changes will be required.6

9.

Illustrate complex concepts with photographs and imagery.

For community members getting involved in the zoning and

planning process, thick zoning documents complete with references of floor-area ratios and massing requirements are not the

best materials to initiate stakeholder involvement sessions. Even

when the documents are condensed, complicated planning and

zoning materials, confusing legal language, and footnotes can be a

barrier to achieving broad public participation. This is where a

visual representation of complex concepts can be helpful.

For instance, typical zoning specifies different land uses, such as

residential, commercial, or institutional, and allowable densities.

For example, an “R-2” category might be two houses per acre,

while “R-6” establishes six residential units on an acre. Those six

units might be single-family homes or attached units. Several pictures can illustrate variations of how the units can be arranged on

an acre and can give better information on some of the trade-offs

of open space, tapering, and height. 

Another innovative way to use imagery is to compare pictures of

stakeholders’ favorite places against a particular zoning code. For

example, residents who are opposed to eight residential units per

acre may be surprised to find that Cape Cod, Massachusetts;

Charleston, South Carolina; or even their local downtown are

built according to densities that are eight units (or more) to an

acre. The pitfall associated with this approach is that much of

what people react to in pictures is the design of the development

97
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

(as opposed to the number of units per acre). Yet this approach

can help to quell fears and stereotypes about higher densities. 

In developing pictures or choosing photographs, you should make

sure to emphasize that the depictions are only examples of possible scenarios. If the depictions are included as part of a formbased zoning code, a developer may think he or she is bound by

the visual code to duplicate the exact house or plan, when your

intention is focused on general features. (For more information

on pattern books, see Principle 9, Policy 3.)

10.

Create and distribute free videos to illustrate local planning

goals.

Technology and computer-assisted tools to communicate planning options and decisions are expanding. For example, the city of

San José, located in California’s Silicon Valley, has developed a

sophisticated computer-assisted design system that allows architects, planners, and local government officials to change drawings,

add landscaping, and modify building types on a computer screen

in front of hundreds of people. 

While not every locality has the resources or expertise to create

such an interactive display, even simple videos can be effective

means of illustrating smart growth plans. One cost-effective way of

creating such a tool is to enlist filmmaking students at a local high

school, community college, or university to document neighborhoods and streets or to conduct resident interviews as part of a

class project. Local smart growth groups may also be willing to

custom-design a video to address local smart growth issues. 

If you do not have access to local filmmakers, you can also make a

compelling case for your planning goals by purchasing videos that

have already been made. One Thousand Friends of Florida has

reviewed many smart growth videos on its Web site, which also

provides a short review of the contents of each video and the necessary ordering information.7 Other nonprofit organizations,

including the Local Government Commission and American

Planning Association, have bookstores that provide videos for free

or at little cost.

An outreach and distribution plan for the video is as important as

its contents. Have videos translated if you need to reach out to

diverse communities. While local libraries and schools are natural

places to show and distribute the videos, video stores, movie

houses, farmers markets, and neighborhood street fairs are also

possible venues. The city of Portland, Oregon, arranged to have

informational videos distributed to local video stores. If there is a

specific audience you want to reach, match the distribution plan to

the audience. For example, if your locality wants to expand bus

service, make sure that higher-density residential areas, major job

centers, and senior citizens are all involved in the process so that

the bus route selected meets the needs of both current and potential riders.

1 See http://washington.uli.org/sga/

2 See http://www.farmland.org/consulting/index.htm.

3 Kiran Cunningham and Hannah McKinney. Regional Community Building:

The Kalamazoo, Michigan, Experience. (Washington, D.C.: ICMA,

September 2001).

4 For more information about the Quick Response Program, see

http://www.lcd.state.or.us/tgm/quickresponse.htm.

5 See http://www.walkinginfo.org/insight/features_articles/silicon/

sil_good_audits.htm.

6 The City of Austin Texas, “Developing a Community Plan,”

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/test/zoning/dev_np.htm.

7 Go to http://www.1000friendsofflorida.org/Other_Info_Sources/

Smart_Growth_Videos.asp.

98
100 Policies for Implementation
100 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

State Local Mix land Take Create a range Create Foster distinctive, Preserve open Strengthen and Provide a Make Encourage

uses advantage of housing walkable attractive space, farmland, direct variety of development community and

of compact opportunities communities communities with natural beauty, development transportation decisions stakeholder

building and choices a strong sense and critical toward existing choices predictable, collaboration

design of place environmental communities fair, and cost- in development

areas effective decisions

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

I. Mix land uses

1. 1. Adopt comprehensive plans and sub-area plans

that encourage a mix of land uses.

2. Use enhanced zoning techniques to achieve a mix

of land uses.

3. Provide regional planning grants for projects that

produce mixed land use.

4. Encourage the redevelopment of single uses into

mixed-use developments.

5. Accommodate the reuse of closed, decommissioned, or obsolete institutional uses.

6. Provide incentives for ground-floor retail and

upper-level residential uses in existing and future

development.

7. Locate neighborhood stores in residential areas.

8. Use floating zones to plan for certain types of

undetermined uses.

9. Organize a variety of land uses vertically and 

horizontally.

10. Develop mixed-use university districts.

II. Take advantage of compact building design

1. Organize a compact development endorsement 

program.

2. Adopt a cottage housing development zoning 

ordinance.

3. Use compact development coupled with onsite best

management practices to improve environmental

outcomes.

4. Use traditional neighborhood design.

5. Use compact design to create more secure 

neighborhoods.

6. Subdivide vacant warehouse space into residential

units.

7. Ensure that big box stores locating in existing

urban centers are appropriately scaled and

designed.

8. Create compact office parks and corporate 

campuses.

9. Strategically reduce or remove minimum lot size

requirements.

10. Manage the transition between higher- and 

lower-density neighborhoods.

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

100 Policies for Implementation
✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

State Local Mix land Take Create a range Create Foster distinctive, Preserve open Strengthen and Provide a Make Encourage

uses advantage of housing walkable attractive space, farmland, direct variety of development community and

of compact opportunities communities communities with natural beauty, development transportation decisions stakeholder

building and choices a strong sense and critical toward existing choices predictable, collaboration

design of place environmental communities fair, and cost- in development

areas effective decisions

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

III. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices

1. Establish an employer-assisted housing 

program.

2. Streamline the development review process when

units include affordable housing.

3. Create a regional program to encourage all 

communities to include a fair share of affordable

and moderate-range housing.

4. Use transportation funds as an incentive to 

provide housing near transit.

5. Use housing to engender 24-hour cities in 

revitalization plans.

6. Integrate smart growth and housing programs.

7. Adopt property tax exemption programs for

mixed-income developments and low-income

homeowners.

8. Develop smart growth funds to promote development in underserved communities.

9. Use different builders on contiguous blocks of land

to ensure a diversity of housing styles.

10. Create a housing trust fund.

IV. Create Walkable Communities

1. Develop a pedestrian master plan.

2. Design communities so that kids can walk to

school.

3. Use trees and other green infrastructure to provide

shelter, beauty, urban heat reduction, and separation from automobile traffic.

4. Encourage safe pedestrian routes to transit.

5. Develop walking awareness and promotion 

programs.

6. Use modern technology to increase pedestrian

safety.

7. Use visual cues and design elements to indicate

pedestrian rights of way and minimize conflicts.

8. Situate parking to enhance the pedestrian environment and facilitate access between destinations.

9. Make places walkable for aging populations in

response to new demographics and special needs.

10. Retrofit superblocks and cul-de-sac street 

networks.
State Local Mix land Take Create a range Create Foster distinctive, Preserve open Strengthen and Provide a Make Encourage

uses advantage of housing walkable attractive space, farmland, direct variety of development community and

of compact opportunities communities communities with natural beauty, development transportation decisions stakeholder

building and choices a strong sense and critical toward existing choices predictable, collaboration

design of place environmental communities fair, and cost- in development

areas effective decisions

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

V. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place

1. Establish revolving loan funds for historic 

preservation.

2. Create community greens.

3. Turn underused highways into boulevards.

4. Develop a comprehensive wayfinding system in

town centers.

5. Use distinctive public transit to increase the

attractiveness of neighborhoods.

6. Highlight cultural assets through public art and

event nights.

7. Use asset-based tools and resident engagement to

reflect community values.

8. Revitalize the waterfront.

9. Make retail centers distinctive and attractive 

destinations.

10. Use transportation enhancements funds 

to create places of distinction.

VI. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas

1. Link land conservation with other smart growth

principles.

2. Use land management techniques and acquisition

to protect drinking water sources.

3. Use an array of financing techniques to preserve

open space.

4. Establish priority-setting criteria for open space

acquisition.

5. Incorporate land conservation into transportation

planning.

6. Take advantage of nature’s ecoservices.

7. Support tree preservation through public-private

partnerships.

8. Allow land trusts to compete for conservation

funds.

9. Invest in the rural economy to preserve working

lands.

10. Use innovative permitting approaches to 

protect critical environmental areas.
State Local Mix land Take Create a range Create Foster distinctive, Preserve open Strengthen and Provide a Make Encourage

uses advantage of housing walkable attractive space, farmland, direct variety of development community and

of compact opportunities communities communities with natural beauty, development transportation decisions stakeholder

building and choices a strong sense and critical toward existing choices predictable, collaboration

design of place environmental communities fair, and cost- in development

areas effective decisions

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓

VII. Strengthen and direct development toward existing communities

1. Encourage the creation of a business improvement

district.

2. Use priority funding areas to direct development

toward existing communities.

3. Offer home equity assurance programs.

4. Establish a land bank authority.

5. Create a development finance insurance program.

6. Develop asset-driven market analysis to encourage

commercial and retail investment in underserved

communities.

7. Encourage infill by adopting innovative stormwater

regulations and practices.

8. Increase transit-oriented development by adding

infill stations on existing transit lines and retrofitting existing stations.

9. Develop a revolving loan fund to support local

independent businesses.

10. Designate a vacant-properties coordinator to use 

code enforcement, provide incentives, and develop 

partnerships to minimize and abate vacant properties.

VIII. Provide a variety of transportation choices

1. Create programs and policies that support 

car sharing.

2. Make sure transportation models and surveys

accurately reflect all modes of transportation.

3. Consult early with emergency responders when

developing smart growth plans.

4. Change state insurance policies so that pay-asyou-drive insurance can be implemented.

5. Consider transportation when developing rating

systems for green buildings and programs.

6. Transform park-and-ride lots into multiuse 

facilities.

7. Integrate goods movement and delivery into 

smart growth.

8. Provide riders with customized transit 

information.

9. Create comprehensive bicycling programs.

10. Introduce value pricing.
State Local Mix land Take Create a range Create Foster distinctive, Preserve open Strengthen and Provide a Make Encourage

uses advantage of housing walkable attractive space, farmland, direct variety of development community and

of compact opportunities communities communities with natural beauty, development transportation decisions stakeholder

building and choices a strong sense and critical toward existing choices predictable, collaboration

design of place environmental communities fair, and cost- in development

areas effective decisions

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓✓

✓ ✓ ✓

IX. Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost-effective

1. Educate elected leaders and public officials about

smart growth.

2. Direct development along corridors to 

create stronger districts.

3. Create pattern books to streamline construction

and enhance project marketability.

4. Make zoning codes and other land development

regulations simple to use and easy 

to read.

5. Create a multimunicipal planning strategy to provide for development in rural markets while maintaining rural character.

6. Establish a state- or regional-level “smart growth

cabinet.”

7. Create an “incentives expert” for developers and

businesses when an area has been designated for

development/redevelopment.

8. Implement geographic information system–based

planning into the development process.

9. Streamline brownfield redevelopment approval

processes.

10. Create investment funds for smart growth projects.

X. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions

1. Use third-party groups to make sure a range of

stakeholder views is expressed.

2. Use nonprofit groups as smart growth consultants.

3. Use a “kick the tires” trip to take local government officials and residents to visit smart growth

communities.

4. Establish context-sensitive design training courses

that focus on community-involvement strategies

for traffic engineers.

5. Use quick-response teams to gain approvals for

smart growth developments.

6. Conduct place audits to determine barriers and

opportunities for smart growth.

7. Develop community indicators to make sure that

development is meeting community goals.

8. Use color-coded maps to establish a planning and

zoning framework for future planning decisions.

9. Illustrate complex concepts with photographs 

and imagery.

10. Create and distribute free videos to illustrate local

planning goals.
Directory of Smart Growth Funders and Lending Institutions
106 GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

The Acushnet Foundation 

c/o Seamark Fin. Svcs.

P.O. Box 1498 

Mattapoisett, MA 02739 

(508) 758-6159 

Contact:William Blasdale

Giving generally limited to the greater New Bedford, MA,

area funding building/renovation projects that support children, human services, health, and historic preservation.

Adirondack Community Trust 

105 Saranac Ave.

Lake Placid, NY 12946 

(518) 523-9904 

Contact: Cali Brooks, Exec. Dir.

info@generousact.org 

http://www.generousact.org

Giving focused in the Adirondack region of NY funding building/renovation projects that support community development,

health care, and historic preservation.

Allegheny Foundation 

301 Grant St., Ste. 3900 

Pittsburgh, PA 15219-6401 

(412) 392-2900 

Contact: Exec. Dir.

http://www.scaife.com

Giving primarily in western PA, with emphasis on Pittsburgh

focusing on community development, youth development, and

historic preservation.

Bank of America

315 Montgomery St.

San Francisco, CA 94104-1866

(404) 607-4173

Contact: Candace C Skarlatos, SVP, Outreach Specialist; or

Randy Muller (environmental projects)

http://www.bankofamerica.com/environment/index.cfm?

Menu_Sel=public&oth=smartgrowth

http://www.bankofamerica.com/environment/index.cfm?

template=env_comm_outreach

Lending for smart growth redevelopment, infill projects, and

mixed-use.

Bank of America

10 Light St., 19th Floor

MD4-302-19-02

Baltimore, MD 21201

(888) 488-9802

$350 Billion Commitment

http://www.bankofamerica.com/community/index.cfm?

template=cdb_threefiftybillion

State-by-state funding:

http://www.bankofamerica.com/community/index.cfm?

template=cdb_localefforts

Bank of America, Community Development Banking

600 Peachtree St., 14th Floor

Atlanta, GA 30308

(404) 607-6245

Contact: Ms. Laura Keenan, GA Development Manager

laura.keenan@bankofamerica.com

Develops and finances affordable housing in metro Atlanta:

http://www.chrcatlanta.org/directry/BACDC.htm

Bank of New York, NY

One Wall Street

New York, New York 10286

(212) 635-7714

Community development lending:

http://www.bankofny.com/pages/acdb.htm

Bank One

1 Bank One Plaza

Chicago, IL 60670

(877) 226-5663

Economic empowerment:

http://www.bankone.com/answers/BolAnswersDetail.aspx?top

=all&segment=ABO&topic=CorporateContributions.WhatWe

Fund&item=EconomicEmpowerment

Bay Area Community Foundation

703 Washington Avenue

Bay City, MI 48708-5717 

(989) 893-4438 

Contact: Roger Merrifield, C.E.O.

(800) 926-3217 

bacfnd@bayfoundation.org

http://www.bayfoundation.org/comminit.html

Giving limited to Bay and Arenac counties, MI, focusing on

investments that enhance and sustain the Bay Area

Community.

Norwin S. and Elizabeth N. Bean Foundation 

c/o New Hampshire Charitable Foundation 

37 Pleasant St. Concord, NH 03301-4005 

(603) 225-6641 

Contact: Nike F. Speltz, Senior Program Office

Giving limited to Amherst and Manchester, NH, focusing on

building/renovating to provide low-income housing.

Directory of Smart Growth Funders and Lending Institutions
APPENDIX B: DIRECTORY OF SMART GROWTH FUNDERS AND LENDING INSTITUTIONS

Bernstein Family Foundation 

(formerly Leo M. Bernstein Family Foundation ) 

3299 K St., N.W., Ste. 700 

Washington, DC 20007 

(202) 965-0737 

Contact: Ami Ann Becker, Exec.V.P. and Managing Dir.

Giving limited to charitable organizations located in or serving areas within a 100-mile radius of Washington, DC, focusing on community development and housing.

Broadway Federal Bank, CA

Community Development Account Representative

4800 Wilshire Blvd.

Los Angeles, CA 90010

(866) 883-0283

Contact: Eric Johnson

Community Development Accounts serving South Central 

Los Angeles

http://www.broadwayfed.com/communit.htm

Annie E. Casey Foundation

701 St. Paul St.

Baltimore, MD 21202

(410) 547-6600

Funds projects that enhance troubled neighborhoods.

Family Economic Success: Provides funding for housing and

business development in distressed communities.

http://www.aecf.org/initiatives/fes/fes/investments.htm

Citigroup

850 Third Ave., 13th Floor

New York, NY 10022

(212) 559-9007

Contact: Kim Latimer-Nelligan, Citigroup CCDE

Center for Community Development Enterprise 

http://www.citigroup.com/citigroup/citizen/community/data/02

ccde.pdf

Community Development mission:

http://www.citigroup.com/citigroup/citizen/community/index.htm

City National Bank, CA

City National Corporation

City National Center

400 North Roxbury Dr.

Beverly Hills, CA 90210

(800) 773-7100

Economic development and affordable housing:

http://www.cityntl.com/infocenter/community/

DTE Energy Foundation 

(formerly Detroit Edison Foundation ) 

2000 2nd Ave., Rm. 1046 WCB 

Detroit, MI 48226-1279 

(313) 235-9416 

Contact: Karla Hall, Secy.

http://www.dteenergy.com/community/foundation/index.html

Funds projects that understand the connection between environmental protection and sustainable development, focusing

on brownfield redevelopment, commercial development, and

affordable housing; covers pre-development costs associated

with environmental assessment and cleanup. Funds primarily

SE Michigan.

DuPage Community Foundation

110 N. Cross St.

Wheaton, IL 60187-5318 

(630) 665-5556 

Contact: David M. McGowan, Exec. Dir.

http://www.dcfdn.org

Giving primarily in IL for building/renovation supporting community development, the environment, and health care.

J.Tom Eady Charitable Trust 

c/o Corsicana National Bank & Trust 

P.O. Box 624 

Corsicana,TX 75151 

(903) 654-4500 

Contact: Les Leskoven, Sr.V.P. and Trust Off.

Giving primarily in Navarro County,TX, funding construction/renovation projects supporting community development

and human services.

Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati, OH

221 East 4th St.

1000 Atrium Two

Cincinnati, OH 45202

(513) 852-7615 

Contact: Carol M. Peterson, Senior Vice President and

Community Investment Officer

Affordable housing program:

http://www.fhlbcin.com/05_AffHouPro.asp

First Tennessee Bank,TN

First Tennessee Housing Corporation

P.O. Box 84, 10th Floor

Memphis,TN 38101 

(901) 523-4444 

First Tennessee Housing Corporation

http://www.firsttennessee.com/ft_docs/cfm/2col.cfm?setion=

company_information&menu=comp_info_housing_corp&

body=housing_corporation

Fleet Boston

100 Federal St., 10034F

Boston, MA 02110

(617) 434-2200

Community Investment Group:

http://www.fleet.com/about_cig_overview.asp

Neighborhood revitalization across the Northeast:

http://www.fleet.com/communityreport/2002/economic.html

Community Partnerships in Massachusetts:

http://www.fleet.com/communityreport/2002/pdfs/Comm

InsertMA.pdf

Community Partnerships in New Jersey:

http://www.fleet.com/communityreport/2002/pdfs/Comm

InsertNJ.pdf

Ford Foundation

320 East 43rd St.

New York, NY 10017 USA

(212) 573-5000 

Community Development:

http://www.fordfound.org/program/asset_units.cfm?unit_name

=community_development

107
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

The Foundation Center

http://www.foundationcenter.org

Lists information on over 70,000 grants and provides 

valuable information to assist grant applications. A paid 

subscription allows you to access everything online or go to a

Cooperating Collection, available in all 50 states, to access

grant information for free.

http://www.foundationcenter.org/collections/index.html;jsessionid=V3WNGFMRSWKR2P5QALRSGW15AAAACI2F 

Mertz Gilmore Foundation

218 East 18th St.

New York, NY 10003-3694 

(212) 475-1137

Contact: Bethany Wall, Program Officer 

bwall@mertzgilmore.org 

Funds historic preservation, community development, and

planning in low-income neighborhoods in NYC:

http://www.mertzgilmore.org/www/default2.asp?section=nyc

The James Irvine Foundation

One Market, Steuart Tower, Suite 2500

San Francisco, CA 94105

(415) 777-2244 

http://www.irvine.org/frameset16.htm

Supports demonstration projects in California that promote

sustainable patterns of land use, revitalize urban areas, and

conserve land.

JSJ Foundation 

700 Robbins Rd.

Grand Haven, MI 49417-2651 

(616) 842-6350 

Contact: Lynne Sherwood, Secy.-Treas.

http://www.jsjcorp.com.

Giving primarily in areas of company operations in FL, MI,

TX, and WI funding construction/renovation projects focusing

on social services and health.

Junior Hospitality Club 

P.O. Box 20393 

Oklahoma City, OK 73156-0393 

(405) 840-9978 

Contact: Mary Tyson, Projects Chair.

Giving primarily in Oklahoma County, OK, funding renovation/

construction projects that support community development.

Living Cities:The National Community Development

Initiative

330 West 108th Street

New York, New York 10025

(212) 663.2078

Partnership of foundations, financial institutions, non-profits,

and the federal government funding CDCs.

http://www.livingcities.org/

Louisville Community Development Bank, KY

Louisville Real Estate Development Company

2901 West Broadway

Louisville, KY 40211

(502) 778-7000

Louisville Real Estate Development Company:

http://www.morethanabank.com/lredc.htm

Lyndhurst Foundation

517 East Fifth St.

Chattanooga,TN 37403-1826

(423) 756-0767

Affordable housing, urban planning, and revitalization 

in Tennessee:

http://www.lyndhurstfoundation.org/prioritf.html

John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

140 S. Dearborn St.

Chicago, IL 60603-5285

(312) 726-8000 

Loans and grants to support low-income housing preservation:

http://www.macfound.org/programs/pri/affordable_housing.htm

The McKnight Foundation 

710 Second St. S. Ste. 400 

Minneapolis, MN 55401 

(612) 333-4220 

Contact: Rip Rapson, President

info@mcknight.org 

http://www.mcknight.org

Limited to MN, providing grants for projects that encourage

developments that create more livable sustainable communities, foster economic development, increase affordable housing, preserve open space and provide transportation options.

http://www.mcknight.org/cfc/region.asp

Living Twin Cities: Encourages smarter growth and tries to

diminish the harm caused by unmanaged growth to create a

vibrant metropolitan region. http://www.mcknight.org/environment/living.asp

Merrill Lynch

California Partnership for Economic Achievement

4695 MacArthur Court, Suite 1540

Newport Beach, CA 92660

(949) 223-6281

Contact: Cathy Paredes, Community Development Manager

California Partnership for Economic Achievement

http://www.californiapartnership.ml.com

http://www.californiapartnership.ml.com/pdf/april2003

announcement.pdf

108
APPENDIX B: DIRECTORY OF SMART GROWTH FUNDERS AND LENDING INSTITUTIONS

J.P. Morgan Chase & Company

270 Park Ave.

New York, NY 10017-2070

(585) 258-5454

Contact: Edward Sigler, Real Estate Lending Department

Commercial lending and investing:

http://www.jpmorganchase.com/cm/cs?pagename=Chase/Href

&urlname=jpmc/community/cdg/clu/overview

Grants for housing and economic development:

http://www.jpmorganchase.com/cm/cs?pagename=Chase/Href

&urlname=jpmc/community/grants

Supporting homeownership opportunities:

http://www.jpmorganchase.com/cm/cs?pagename=Chase/Href

&urlname=jpmc/community/cdg/rlu

Supporting the revitalization of low- and moderate-income

communities:

http://www.jpmorganchase.com/cm/cs?pagename=Chase/Href

&urlname=jpmc/community/cdg/rel

National Community Reinvestment Coalition

733 15th Street, NW, Ste. 540

Washington, D.C. 20005

(202) 628-8866

http://www.ncrc.org

For a list of banks participating in sub-prime lending.

The Parodneck Foundation for Self-Help, Housing &

Community Development, Inc.

(formerly The Consumer-Farmer Foundation, Inc. ) 

121 6th Ave., Ste. 501 

New York, NY 10013 

(212) 431-9700 

Contact: Harold DeRienzo, Pres.

Giving limited to New York, NY, focusing on low-income housing, planning, and community development with emphasis on

senior citizens.

PNC Bank

One PNC Plaza, 29th Floor

249 Fifth Ave.

Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Contact: Mia Hallett,Vice President and Manager 

PNC Foundation

Foundations@pncbank.com

Community development funding:

http://www.pnc.com/aboutus/charitablecontributions.html#cdv

The Schumann Fund for New Jersey, Inc.

21 Van Vleck St.

Montclair, NJ 07042 

973) 509-9883 

Contact: Barbara Reisman, Exec. Dir.

http://fdncenter.org/grantmaker/schumann/

Supports coordinated land use planning and funds brownfield

redevelopment primarily in New Jersey.

Seedco and Non-Profit Assistance Corporation

915 Broadway, Ste. 1703 

New York, NY 10010

(212) 473-0255 

Contact:William J. Grinker, Pres.

http://www.seedco.org 

Supports low-income revitalization projects focusing on housing and economic development.

Shorebank

7054 S. Jeffery Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60649

realestate@sbk.com

(773) 420-4824

Contact: Jack Crane

Green historic rehabilitation in Ohio:

http://www.clevelandgbc.org/cec/

Financing focused on rehabilitation and multi-family 

residential:

http://www.sbk.com/livesite/realestate/realestate.asp

City of Cleveland, Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative:

http://www.shorebankcleveland.com/real_estate/

Silicon Valley Bank, CA

3003 Tasman Dr.

Santa Clara, CA 95054

(415) 344-6223 

Contact: Christine Carr, Senior Relationship Manager,

Community Development Finance

ccarr@svbank.com 

Community development finance:

http://www.svb.com/bus_serv/lending/cdf.html

Sovereign Bank, PA

CRA Community Development Office

Mail Code: 10-6438-CD8

P.O. Box 12646

601 Penn St.

Reading, PA 19601

(877) 768-9121

Community Development

http://www.sovereignbank.com/companyinfo/comdev.asp

Morgan Stanley

Community Affairs

1601 Broadway, 12th Floor

New York, NY 10019

(212) 259-1235

Community Development Giving:

http://a992.g.akamai.net/7/992/770/d9a18c587ddb79/www.

morganstanley.com/about/inside/charitable_annual2002.pdf

SunTrust

Mail Code HDQ 4109

P.O. Box 85024

Richmond,VA 23285-5024

(800) 279-4824

SunTrust Community Development Corporation

http://www.suntrust.com/common/AboutST/diversity/

community_diversity_efforts.asp

SunTrust and the Florida Community Loan Fund

http://www.fclf.org/floridaSolutionsInvestorStories.cfm

109
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Surdna Foundation

330 Madison Ave., 30th Floor

New York, NY 10017

(212) 557-0010

http://www.surdna.org/programs/environment.html

Smart growth development, transportation and urban/suburban land use issues.

Turner Foundation, Inc.

One CNN Center

Suite 1090 South Tower

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404) 681-9900

http://www.turnerfoundation.org/grants/pa.asp

Funds air quality, energy, and transportation policies that support sustainable land use.

U.S. Bancorp

U.S. Bancorp Center

800 Nicollet Mall

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Community development: http://www.usbank.com/about/community_relations/community_invest.html

Wachovia

565 5th Ave.

New York, NY 

(212) 983-0651

Contact: Jane Henderson, Senior Vice President 

Director of Community Development

contact.community@wachovia.com

Statewide initiatives:

http://www.wachovia.com/inside/page/0,,139_413_424,00.html

Wachovia Foundation:

http://www.wachovia.com/inside/page/0,,139_414_430,00.html

Affordable housing initiatives:

http://www.wachovia.com/inside/page/0,,139_413_419_428,

00.html

Wells Fargo

Wells Fargo Housing Foundation 

6th and Marquette, Suite 1900 

Minneapolis, MN 55479

(612) 667-2146

Local initiatives:

http://www.wellsfargo.com/about/charitable/index.jhtml

Wells Fargo Housing Foundation, homeownership for lowincome families:

http://www.wellsfargo.com/about/wfhf_oview.jhtml

110
Bibliography | List of Acronyms
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

Congress for the New Urbanism, The Coming Demand. 2001.

http://www.cnu.org/cnu_reports/ Coming_Demand.pdf.

Congress for the New Urbanism, Greyfields Into Goldfields. 2001.

Corbin, Jeffry, and Wayne Hunt. “A Single Voice.” American City and County 118,

issue no. 3 (March 2003), 20-29.

Department of Housing and Urban Development. Regulatory Barriers

Clearinghouse. www.huduser.org/rbc/.

Duany, Andres, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, and Jeff Speck. Suburban Nation. New

York: North Point Press, 2000.

Duerksen, Chris, and Robert Blanchard. “Belling the Box: Planning for Large

Scale Retail Stores.” Proceedings of the 1998 National Planning Conference.

www.asu.edu/caed/proceedings98/Duerk/duerk.html.

Fannie Mae Maxwell Awards of Excellence Program 2001-2002. www.fanniemaefoundation.org/grants/. 

Federal Highway Administration. “Context Sensitive Design/Thinking Beyond the

Pavement.” www.fhwa.dot.gov/csd/index.htm.

Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities. The Arts and

Smart Growth: The Role of Arts in Place Making. Translation Paper No. 12 (April

2003).

Greater Minnesota Housing Fund. www.gmhf.com/.

Gunts, Edward. “Rolling Out the Welcome Mat.” Baltimore Sun. January 9, 2000.

Hollis, Linda, and William Fulton. Open Space Protection: Conservation Meets Growth

Management. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and

Metropolitan Policy, 2002. http://www.brookings.org/es/urban/publications/hollisfultonopenspace.htm.

Howe, Deborah A. Aging and Smart Growth: Building Aging-Sensitive Communities.

Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities. Translation Paper

No. 7 (December 2001). www.giaging.org/aging%20paper.pdf.

Howe, Deborah A., Nancy J. Chapman, and Sharon A. Baggett. Planning for an

Aging Society. PAS Report no. 451. American Planning Association Planning

Advisory Service, 1994.

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: 1961.

Lang, Robert. Office Sprawl: The Evolving Geography of Business. Washington, D.C.:

The Brookings Institute, October 2000.

112

Bibliography

Alexander, Frank S. Renewing Public Assets for Community Development. A Report for

the Local Initiatives Support Coalition, October 1, 2000. 

American Planning Association. Regional Approaches to Affordable Housing, Chicago,

IL. February 2003.

American Planning Association, Planning for Smart Growth, 2002 State of the States,

Chicago, IL: APA, February 2002.

Baer, Susan F. The Case of a Milwaukee Business Improvement District: Politics and

Institutional Arrangements. Prepared on behalf of the 2001 Annual Meeting of the

American Political Science Association, August 2001.

Beaumont, Constance. Better Models for Superstores. Washington, D.C.: National

Trust for Historic Preservation, 1997.

Beimborn, Edward, Rob Kennedy, and William Schaefer. Inside the Black Box:

Making Transportation Models Work for Livable Communities. New York:

Environmental Defense,

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/1859_InsideBlackBox.pdf. 

Bodaken, Michael. “The Increasing Shortage of Affordable Rental Housing in

America: Action Items for Preservation.” Fannie Mae Foundation: Housing Facts &

Findings 4, issue no. 4.

Bohl, Charles C. Placemaking: Developing Town Centers, Main Streets, and Urban

Villages. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2002.

Brookings Institute. Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.

www.brookings.org/es/urban/urban.htm.

CalPERS Web site. www.calpers.ca.gov/.

Carestens, Diane Y. Site Planning and Design for the Elderly: Issues, Guidelines, and

Alternatives. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, December 1997.

Casey, Dougal M. 2002 U.S. Retail Sales, Mall Sales, and Department Store Sales

Review. New York: International Council of Shopping Centers, April 2003.

CB Richard Ellis, Inc. Washington, D.C., Metro Area Office Market, End of Year

Report-2002. 

Center for Community Change. www.communitychange.org.

City of Austin, Texas, “Developing a Community Plan.”

www.ci.austin.tx.us/test/zoning/dev_np.htm.

Congress for the New Urbanism. Civilizing Downtown Highways: Putting New

Urbanism to Work on California’s Highways. San Francisco, CA: CNU, 2002.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Leonhardt, David. “Homes Prices Still Rising, But More Slowly.” New York Times.

June 3, 2003.

Lockwood, Charles. “Raising the Bar: Town Centers Are Outperforming

Traditional Suburban Real Estate Products.” Urban Land Magazine (February

2003).

Maryland Department of Transportation. “When Main Street Is a State Highway:

Blending Function, Beauty, and Identity.” 2001. www.marylandroads.com. 

Meyer, Peter B. Approach to Brownfield Regeneration: The Relative Value of Financial

Incentives, Relaxed Mitigation Standards and Regulatory Certainty. Working paper.

Louisville, KY: Center for Environmental Policy and Management, University of

Louisville, 2000.

Michigan Housing Trust Fund. www.mhtf.org.

Myers, Dowell, and Elizabeth Gearin. “Current Preference and Future Demand

for Denser Residential Environments.” Housing Policy Debate 12 (2001), 637-639.

National Charrette Institute. www.charretteinstitute.org/.

National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse. “Enhancing America’s

Communities: A Guide to Transportation Enhancements.” Washington, D.C.:

NTEC, 2002.

National Trust for Historic Preservation’s Main Street Center. www.mainst.org/.

Nelson, C. Arthur, et al. The Link Between Growth Management and Housing

Affordability: The Academic Evidence. Prepared for the Brookings Institution Center

on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Washington, D.C.: February 2002.

“New Urban Projects on a Neighborhood Scale in the United States.” New Urban

News 7, issue no. 8 (2002).

Pacific Coast Capital Partners, LLC. www.paccoastcapital.com/. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. www.walkinginfo.org/, 

www.bicyclinginfo.org/.

PolicyLink Equitable Development Toolkit.

www.policylink.org/EquitableDevelopment/.

Porter, Michael E. “The Competitive Advantage of the Inner City.” Harvard

Business Review (May-June 1995). 

Project for Public Spaces. www.pps.org.

Putnam, Robert. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.

New York: Simon and Schuster, 2000.

Smart Growth America. www.smartgrowthamerica.org

Smart Growth Network. www.smartgrowth.org

Surface Transportation Policy Project. “Driven to Spend.” March 2000.

www.transact.org. 

Urban Design Associates. “Pattern Books and Design Guidelines.” 

www.urbandesignassociates.com/servicespattern.html. 

Urban Land Institute. Smart Growth Case Studies Web site.

http://research.uli.org/DK/CaStd/re_CaStd_SmrtGrthCsStd_fst.html.

US Environmental Protection Agency. Our Built and Natural Environments. EPA

Publication #231-R-01-002. Washington, D.C.: EPA, 2001.

Washington, DC Department of Planning. “Principle 5: Mix of Uses. Providing a

Diversity of Uses for a Vibrant Center.”

www.planning.dc.gov/documents/pdf/Trans-Principle5.pdf.

Weissbourd, Robert. The Market Potential of Inner-City Neighborhoods: Filling the

Information Gap. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, March 1, 1999.

Wigfall, La Barbara, and Wendy Griswold. Community Participation in Brownfield

Redevelopment. Manhattan, KS: Department of Landscape Architecture and

Community and Regional Planning, Kansas University,1999.

113
GETTING TO SMART GROWTH II

List of Acronyms

ARC - Atlanta Regional Commission

BID - business improvement district

BMP - best management practice

C/CAG - City/County Association of Governments of 

San Mateo County

CDC - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CHA - Chicago Housing Authority

CHD - cottage housing development

COAH - Council on Affordable Housing

COG - council of governments

CPTED - crime prevention through environmental design

CSD - context-sensitive design

CTN - Community Transit Network

DFI - development finance insurance

DOT - Department of Transportation

EPA - Environmental Protection Agency

HEAP - home equity assurance program

HUD - Department of Housing and Urban Development

GIS - geographic information systems

LBA - land bank authority

LCI - Livable Centers Initiative

LEED - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

M-NCPPC - Maryland-National Capital Park and 

Planning Commission

MPO - metropolitan planning organization

NJHT - New Jersey Historic Trust

PFA - priority funding area

PUD - planned unit development

RAHS - Regional Affordable Housing Strategy

RLF - revolving loan fund

SMART - safe, mixed income, accessible, reasonably priced, 

and transit-oriented

SNAP - Strategic Neighborhood Action Plan

TCRPC - Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council

TE - transportation enhancements

TND - traditional neighborhood design

TOD - transit-oriented development

VCP - voluntary cleanup program

VOC - volatile organic compounds

114