|
Solutions: Regional Cooperation
Although difficult to achieve, perhaps the most effective strategy for combatting sprawl involves cooperation among communities within a county or region. The bottom line is that almost every kind of community -- city, inner-suburb, outer-suburb, small town -- benefits from managing growth effectively.
The Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities is one of the premier U.S. examples of a strong regional approach to land use planning, and more recently, the provision of key government services. The Metropolitan Council is composed of one council member from each of 16 districts and one chairperson, all of whom are appointed by the governor. As summarized on their Web site:
"The Council provides everyday services and helps to plan for the Twin Cities of the future. We operate the region's bus system, collect and clean wastewater, are a housing and redevelopment agency, and planand fund parks and trails. The Council also prepares long-range plans for the development of vital regional services -- aviation, transportation, parks and open space, water quality and water management -- and a comprehensive plan for how the region should grow in the future."
Metro, the regional government for the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area, was created in 1979. Its primary responsibilities involve land-use and transportation planning. Metro also owns and operates the regional zoo, several major parks, solid waste transfer stations and hazardous waste facilites, and the Oregon Convention Center. As Metro explains on its web site:
"A traffic problem in Beaverton is a traffic problem in Portland; westside light rail will improve eastern Clackamas County's air quality. More efficient land use in downtown Gresham lessens the pressure to develop farmland in Hillsboro. Roads don't stop at city boundaries and water quality problems find their way from stream to river. By providing regional coordination and setting regional standards, cities and counties can achieve better coordination with the neighbors-and this benefits all of the region."
The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy has published a quite interesting report, Exploring Ad Hoc Regionalism, focusing on a relatively new, but growing, trend in dealing with regional issues: the formation of organizations that represent coalitions of interest groups and individuals.
To give a flavor of the contents, here is a short excerpt from the introduction:
 "During the 1980s and into the 1990s, public opinion surveys of urban residents revealed significant support for regional solutions for many problems associated with growth, development and economic transformation. However, voters continued to resist proposals for regional actions that would diminish the independence of their local governments. ... By the early 1990s, interest in regional governance and action was renewed, but this time in a significantly more bottom up manner. New approaches to regional problem solving were emerging with the goal of providing needed capacity for action while avoiding popular resistance to enlarging regional government. In many metropolitan areas, the weakness of 'official' regional agencies was being offset by leadership groups formed to focus on selected regional concerns. These groups sought to identify areas of common interests that could unite diverse stakeholder groups as well as governments ... These groups avoided promoting regulatory solutions, preferring instead collaborative, incentive-base approaches for meeting various regional challenges.
Neal R. Peirce and Curtis W. Johnson have been invited into more than a dozen metropolitan areas to help community leaders identify key regional problems and focus on potential solutions. Not surprisingly, sprawl is often one of the major problems focused on. Two of the "Peirce Reports" available online are those for the Nashville, Tennessee region, and for Reading/Berks County, Pennsylvania.
Rochester, New York, Mayor William Johnson, Jr., argues in a short commentary for the Planning Commissioners Journal titled Metropolitan Pressure Points that regional cooperation is essential if cities and their suburbs are to prosper in today's increasingly global economy (read excerpts from article; can also be ordered and downloaded online).
First Suburbs is the name of three affiliated consortiums of inner-ring suburban communities around Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati, Ohio. These communities are developing a common agenda that largely focuses on growth, transportation, and economic development issues. For more details, see our Ohio page.
One of the most potentially far-reaching examples of regional (even multi-state) cooperation to address the impacts that a sprawling pattern of land development can have on natural resources can be seen the the Chesapeake 2000 Bay Agreement Take a look at just some of the many noteworthy goals and policies contained in this Agreement, signed on June 28, 2000 by the governors of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, the mayor of Washington, DC, and the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
|
An additional three million people are expected to settle in the watershed by 2020. This growth could potentially eclipse the nutrient reduction and habitat protection gains of the past. Therefore it is critical that we consider our approaches to land use in order to ensure progress in protecting the Bay and its local watersheds. ...
We acknowledge that future development will be sustainable only if we protect our natural and rural resource land, limit impervious surfaces and concentrate new growth in existing population centers or suitable areas served by appropriate infrastructure. We will work to integrate environmental, community and economic goals by promoting more environmentally sensitive forms of development. We will also strive to coordinate land-use, transportation, water and sewer and other infrastructure planning so that funding and policies at all levels of government do not contribute to poorly planned growth and development or degrade local water quality and habitat. ...
By 2001, complete an assessment of the Bay’s resource lands including forests and farms, emphasizing their role in the protection of water quality and critical habitats, as well as cultural and economic viability.
Provide financial assistance or new revenue sources to expand the use of voluntary and market-based mechanisms such as easements, purchase or transfer of development rights and other approaches to protect and preserve natural resource lands.
Strengthen programs for land acquisition and preservation within each state that are supported by funding and target the most valued lands for protection. Permanently preserve from development 20 percent of the land area in the watershed by 2010. ...
By 2012, reduce the rate of harmful sprawl development of forest and agricultural land in the Chesapeake Bay watershed by 30 percent measured as an average over five years from the baseline of 1992-1997, with measures and progress reported regularly to the Chesapeake Executive Council.
By 2005, in cooperation with local government, identify and remove state and local impediments to low impact development designs to encourage the use of such approaches and minimize water quality impacts.
Work with communities and local governments to encourage sound land use planning and practices that address the impacts of growth, development and transportation on the watershed.
By 2002, review tax policies to identify elements which discourage sustainable development practices or encourage undesirable growth patterns. ...
The jurisdictions will promote redevelopment and remove barriers to investment in underutilized urban, suburban and rural communities by working with localities and development interests.
By 2002, the signatory jurisdictions will promote coordination of transportation and land use planning to encourage compact, mixed use development patterns, revitalization in existing communities and transportation strategies that minimize adverse effects on the Bay and its tributaries.
By 2002, each state will coordinate its transportation policies and programs to reduce the dependence on automobiles by incorporating travel alternatives such as telework, pedestrian, bicycle and transit options, as appropriate, in the design of projects so as to increase the availability of alternative modes of travel as measured by increased use of those alternatives.
|
|
to top of page