Study Guides (400,000)
CA (160,000)
UTSC (10,000)
Geography (100)

Finals Essay Question #9 - Gillham

Course Code
Andre Sorensen
Study Guide

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 16 pages of the document.
Gillham (2002) Chapter 14: Regionalism
-to prevent leapfrogging of suburbanization across local communities borders, Growth
Boundaries need to be considered over a whole metropolitan area
-regional transportation decisions can work most effectively when made in conjunction with
regional land use decisions
-during the mid-20th century, the nations (USA) centres that were its main economic units, and
now those city centres have grown into today’s vast metropolitan area
-as the nations cities have grown, many of them have engaged in a continuous struggle over how
to manage their rapidly increasing areas
-to address problems brought on by rapid extensions, New York choose to annex a large part of
its surrounding area in 1898, then others cities followed, Boston, St, Louis
Annexation: adding unincorporated land to the city and Consolidation: absorbing adjacent
municipalities) was a common method of handling urban growth in 19th century
-the twelve largest US cities that showed population gains between 1950 and 1980 were those
that expanded their geographical areas, for example Houston
-many cities such as New York have long since outgrown their 19th century boundaries and
annexing adjacent communities is no longer a viable option
-David Rusk: cities that are capable of annexation and are still growing are among the most
successful in the nation, he called these citiesElastic Cities in that they are able to change their
physical shape and accommodate growth
-some of theseelastic cities have managed to save themselves from some of the dire fiscal
problems of suburbanization by acquiring their suburban tax base
-when it comes to density, it is apparent that annexation along doesnt seem to be doing much to
change the rapidly spreading, auto-dependant and low-density patterns of development
-annexation is not enough more cities, some state laws do not even provide for annexation

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

-metropolitans are then forced to look for other methods of regional approach to solving
-Regionalism or metropolitanism, has recurred from time to time as a possible solution to the
urban ills of rapid extension of American metropolitan areas
-regionalism has been gaining popularity in some respects due to the cycle of growth and change,
because development has mushroomed during the 1990s resulting in increasing concerns about
-other alternatives to annexation and consolidation are: organization of powerful new
metropolitan governments, the creation of new regional services districts
-local and county efforts at urban-growth control, though effective at small communities, dont
solve regional sprawl problems
-the question of solving housing expense may be solved through the Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) with a strong affordable housing program
-A UGB can cover an entire metropolitan area, including multiple cities and towns, if properly
planned such a technique can be used to manage and direct growth on a regional basis, thus
limiting sprawl development
-but a regional UGB cannot be implemented by existing local governments unless a group of
localities agrees to work together in a formal process
-the primary transportation burden will continue to fall upon the nations roadway system, and it
is recognized that congestion is a major concern and needs to be addressed
-if transit is to work, we need to understand that a change in land-use is needed
-compact developments are a start, coordinated land-used and transportation programs and
programs that make use of existing urban programs, EX Portland is doing this and made possible
through there regional government

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

-EX, Atlanta is starting to do this the GRTA (Georgia Regional Transportation Authority) a state-
centred authority that has the power to build or veto roads and transit systems in the Atlanta
metropolitan area
-in most metropolitan areas, there is simply no formal regional structure with any significant
powers linking expansion of transit or highway systems to land use planning for their areas
-land-use and transportation must be coordinated at a regional level if there is to be any
alternative to sprawl development
This fiscal measure of tax-revenue sharing is among other things, intended to promote greater
equity of resources between both suburban and urban districts, for example tax-revenue sharing
can be used to improve education in urban areas
-such measures can also be used to relive the pressured competition between municipalities to
attract commercial projects
Orfield says that in every part of the USA, wherever social needs are growing the tax base is
uncertain or declining, wherever tax base is solid, social needs are stable
-many taxpayers believe that they should get back what they invest in their communities
Regional Tax base sharing takes funds out of local control and directs it to other communities
-throughout the USA only a few places have carried out the objectives set out above
-Portland Oregon the most cited adopted the most ambitious regional agenda in the nation, but
other areas have done good things including St Paul and Atlanta
-Portland has an urban growth boundary based on every service district, the UGB encompasses
the entire metropolitan area, administered by a directly elected regional government called Metro
-its existence even though it has had many achievements remains in jeopardy
-in 1973 reacting to the suburban sprawl that was rapidly consuming the neighbouring California,
the Oregon state legislature made it mandatory for cities in the Portland region to join the
Columbia Regional Association of Governments (CRAG), and created the Land Conservation
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version