About the Editors and Contributors by deafeningbuzz

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 13

									                                ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS         237




                     About the Editors and Contributors

Editors

Wim Wiewel is the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
at the University of Baltimore. Previously he served as Dean of the College
of Business Administration and the College of Urban Planning and Public
Affairs at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He is a past president of the
Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning. His publications include
Suburban Sprawl: Private Decisions and Public Policy, When Corpora-
tions Leave Town: The Costs and Benefits of Metropolitan Job Sprawl, and
Urban-Suburban Interdependencies.

Gerrit-Jan Knaap is Professor of Urban Studies and Planning and Director
of the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education at the Uni-
versity of Maryland, College Park. He earned his BS from Willamette Uni-
versity, his MS and PhD from the University of Oregon, and received
postdoctoral training at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, all in eco-
nomics. Knaap is the coauthor or coeditor of four books: Land Market Moni-
toring for Smart Urban Growth, The Regulated Landscape: Lessons on State
Land Use Planning from Oregon, Spatial Development in Indonesia: Review
and Prospects, and Environmental Program Evaluation: A Primer.

Contributors

Thomas T. Ankersen is a Legal Skills Professor and Director at the Univer-
sity of Florida Conservation Clinic and Codirector of the Summer Environ-
mental Law Program at the University of Florida/University of Costa Rica
Joint Program in Environmental Law, Gainesville.

James R. Cohen is Lecturer and Director of Graduate Studies in the Urban
Studies and Planning Program at the University of Maryland, College Park.

Christine Danis, AICP, is Project Manager of the National Center for Neigh-
borhood and Brownfields Redevelopment, at the Edward J. Bloustein School
of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey,
New Brunswick.

                                                                           237
238   ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS


Nancy Frank is Associate Professor of Urban Planning at the University of
Wisconsin–Milwaukee.

Priscilla Geigis is Director of Massachusetts State Parks and formerly the
Director of Community Preservation for the Executive Office of Environ-
mental Affairs, Massachusetts.

Michael J. Greenberg, PhD, is Professor and Associate Dean for Faculty at
the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, and Director
of the National Center for Neighborhood and Brownfields Redevelopment,
both at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick.

Michael Greenwald is Assistant Professor of Urban Planning at the Univer-
sity of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.

David W. Gross, PhD, is a conservation program development consultant in
Ithaca, New York, and was formerly a member of the Department of Natural
Resources, Cornell University.

Elisabeth Hamin is Assistant Professor in the Department of Landscape
Architecture and Regional Planning, University of Massachusetts–Amherst.

Richard W. Jelier, PhD, is Associate Professor at the School of Public and
Nonprofit Administration at Grand Valley State University in Grand Rapids,
Michigan.

Nicole C. Kibert is an attorney at Carlton Fields in Tampa, Florida.

Edward W. LeClear is Special Projects Coordinator for the Pennsylvania
Downtown Center in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Greg Lindsey is Director of the Center for Urban Policy and the Environ-
ment and is the Duey-Murphy Professor of Rural Land Policy, School of
Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University–Purdue University
Indianapolis (IUPUI).

Henry Mayer, PhD, is Executive Director of the National Center for Neigh-
borhood and Brownfields Redevelopment, Edward J. Bloustein School of
Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey,
New Brunswick.
                               ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS       239


Jeremy Morris is at West Virginia University, Morgantown.

Brian W. Ohm, JD, is Associate Professor in the Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin–Madison.

John Ottensmann is Associate Director of the Center for Urban Policy and
the Environment and Professor of Public and Environmental Affairs at the
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University–Purdue
University Indianapolis (IUPUI).

Jamie Palmer is Planner/Policy Analyst at the Center for Urban Policy and
the Environment, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana Uni-
versity–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI); President of the Indiana
Planning Association; and Chair of the Indiana Land Use Consortium.

Robert Parker, AICP, is Director of the Community Planning Workshop,
Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management, University of
Oregon, Eugene.

Meredith Perry is Community Outreach Specialist in the Office of Grants
and Program Review, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.

L. Christopher Plein, PhD, is Associate Professor of Public Administration
at West Virginia University, Morgantown.

John Schaerer is Special Assistant for External Affairs at the University of
Tennessee at Chattanooga.

Linda Silka is Director of the Center for Family, Work, and Community;
Professor in the Department of Regional Economic and Social Development;
and Special Assistant to the Provost for Community–University Partnerships
at the University of Massachusetts–Lowell.

Laura Solitare, PhD, is Research Associate at the National Center for Neigh-
borhood and Brownfields Redevelopment, Edward J. Bloustein School of
Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey,
New Brunswick, and is also Assistant Professor of Urban Planning and Envi-
ronmental Policy at the Barbara Jordan/Mickey Leland School of Public Af-
fairs, Texas Southern University, Houston.

Richard Thorsten is a PhD candidate at the University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill.
240   ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS


Carol L. Townsend is Community and Economic Development Agent at the
Michigan State University Extension and Urban Component Coordinator,
United Growth for Kent County, Kent/Michigan State University Extension,
Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Joseph Tutterrow is Director of the Indiana Land Resources Council and
was formerly an Assistant State Forester at the Indiana Department of Natu-
ral Resources.

Kendra C. Wills is Land Use Extension Agent at the Michigan State Univer-
sity Extension and is Project and Rural Coordinator, United Growth for Kent
County, Kent/Michigan State University Extension, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Jeffrey Wilson is a scholar at the Center for Urban Policy and the Environ-
ment, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, and Assistant Professor
in the Department of Geography, Indiana University–Purdue University In-
dianapolis (IUPUI).
           About the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a nonprofit and tax-exempt educa-
tional institution established in 1974 to study and teach land policy, includ-
ing land economics and land taxation. The Institute is supported primarily
by the Lincoln Foundation, which was established in 1947 by Cleveland
industrialist John C. Lincoln. He drew inspiration from the ideas of Henry
George, the nineteenth-century American political economist, social philoso-
pher and author of the book, Progress and Poverty.
   The Institute’s goals are to integrate theory and practice to better shape
land policy decisions and to share understanding about the multidisciplinary
forces that influence public policy in the United States and internationally.
The Institute organizes its work in three departments: valuation and taxation,
planning and development, and international studies, with special programs
in Latin America and China.
   The Lincoln Institute seeks to improve the quality of debate and dissemi-
nate knowledge of critical issues in land policy by bringing together schol-
ars, policy makers, practitioners and citizens with diverse backgrounds and
experience. We study, exchange insights and work toward a broader under-
standing of complex land and tax policies. The Institute does not take a par-
ticular point of view, but rather serves as a catalyst to facilitate analysis and
discussion of these issues—to make a difference today and to help policy
makers plan for tomorrow.




113 Brattle Street
Cambridge, MA 02138–3400 USA

Phone: 617–661–3016 x127 or 800–LAND-USE (800–526–3873)
Fax: 617–661–7235 or 800–LAND-944 (800–526–3944)
E-mail: help@lincolninst.edu
Web: www.lincolninst.edu




                                                                             241
                                                                         Index


Affordable housing, 222                    Central Indiana case study, 95–113
Agricultural land; see Farmland             collaboration in, 108–110
Air-quality program, 65                     implementation, 100–101
Alexiou, George, 186                        land cover change project, 101–104
American Bar Association (ABA), 65          land use in, 107–108
American Planning Association (APA),        major collaborative projects, 102–103
     47, 60, 219, 223                       outcomes of, 110–112
Americana Foundation, 151                   planning practices, 104–107
Anderson, John, 208                         program activity planning and
Ankersen, Thomas T., 7, 64                        collaboration, 96–100
Antisprawl initiatives, 22                  university-stakeholder collaborations,
Arendt, Randall, 153, 159–160                     98–99
Avin, Uri, 18                              Chesapeake Bay, 17–19, 22–23
Ayers Saint Gross (ASG), 185               Citizen Planner Program, 159
                                           Clean Air Act, 65
Barney, John, 132, 146                     Clean and Green program, 140
Bergeron, Arthur, 123                      Clean Water Act, 65
Bloustein School of Planning and Public    Client-driven projects, 38
     Policy, 83–84                         Clinical environmental law education,
Board of County Commissioners of                overview of, 65–67
     Brevard County v. Snyder, 71          Clinical legal education case study; see
Bratina, John, 47                               Environmental law clinics;
“Broken Windows” (Wilson and                    University of Florida Conservation
     Kelling), 213                              Clinic
Brown, Barbara, 27                         Cohen, James R., 6, 13–14, 17–18
Brownfields, 5; see also National Center   Communities; see also University-
     for Neighborhood and Brownfields           community partnerships
     Redevelopment                          professional practice and, 57
Brownfields Redevelopment Act, 76           universities and, 3
Brownfields Voluntary Cleanup and          Community design team; see West
     Revitalization Incentive Programs,         Virginia Community Design Team
     24                                         (CDT) case study
Bugher, Mark, 223, 232                     Community Planning Workshop (CPW)
Building Great Neighborhoods, 155               case study, 49–63
Burden, Dan, 155                            communities and professional practice,
Burke, Brian, 224, 226, 233                       57
                                            dual mission of, 58–59
Calthorpe, P., 43                           faculty and students, 58
Campus (Turner), 184                        funding, 55

                                                                                243
244   INDEX


Community Planning Workshop (CPW)            Downtown redevelopment, 34, 73–76
     case study (continued)                  Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company, 229
 history of, 50–51
 implementation of, 51–54                    Eagle Point (Ore.), 51
 institutional structure, 55–56              Earthjustice, 66
 lessons of, 61–63                           Economic development, 50
 leveraging limited resources, 56–58         Economic Growth, Resource Protection
 mission of, 49–50                                and Planning Act (Md.), 23
 project selection and market areas, 52–53   Educational mission, 62
 as service-learning program, 58–59          Endangered Species Act, 65
 smart growth and, 51                        Enterprise zone, 23
 staffing and organizational structure,      Environmental issues, 4, 142
       53–54                                 Environmental law clinics, 64–65, 70;
 state government and, 56–57                      see also University of Florida
 structure of, 51–54                              Conservation Clinic
 student researchers, 59–60                   client-client relationships, 78–79
Community preservation; see                   clients of, 66
     Massachusetts community                 Environmental legislation, 65
     preservation case study                 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 5
Community service, 52, 55–56                  Education Grants Program, 151
Congress for the New Urbanism, 24, 39,        smart growth principles of, 12–13
     47                                      Environmental Systems Research
Conservation assessments, 65                      Institute (ESRI), 18–19
Consulting organizations, 57
Curriculum                                   Faculty commitment, 58, 61
 smart growth and, 6–7                       Farmland, 4, 131, 148–150, 219
 “This Land is Your Land” learning           Fee structure, 61
       series, 157–159                       Ferchill Group, 41
Cutler, R. W., 36                            Florida Community Redevelopment Act
                                                  (CRA), 73
Danis, Christine, 8, 83                      Forest Conservation Act (Md.), 22, 28
Defenders of Wildlife, 66                    Frank, Nancy, 6, 34
Department of Education                      Freed, Debby, 195
 Fund for Improvement of Post-               Freeway demolition; see Milwaukee
      Secondary Education (FIPSE), 50             freeway demolition case study
 university-community partnership            Frey Foundation, 10, 151, 160
      program, 5                             Funding streams, 62
Department of Housing and Urban
    Development, Community Outreach          Garfield Park Neighborhoods Association
    Partnership Center program                    (GPNA) project, 156–157
    (COPC), 5                                Geigis, Priscilla, 9, 117
Department of Transportation, 37             Gentrification study, 155
Designated growth areas, 23, 84              Geographic information system (GIS), 8,
Development patterns, 4                           53, 73, 83, 103, 111, 118, 140, 186,
DiGiacomo, Anthony, 27, 30                        189, 227
Dodge, David, 27–28                           examples of, 91–92
                                                                      INDEX 245


Geographic information system (GIS)      Jacobs, Alan, 40
    (continued)                          Jelier, Richard W., 10, 147
 role of, 88–91                          Job Creation Tax Credit Program, 24
 use of, 92
Glendening, Parris, 23                   Kelley, Margaret, 207
Goal Oriented Zoning (GOZ), 90           Kelling, George L., 213
Godschalk, David, 186                    Kellogg Foundation, 151
Graduate teaching fellows (GTFs), 50     Kent, T. J., 224
Grand Valley Metropolitan Council        Kibert, Nicole C., 7, 64
    (GVMC), 151
Granholm, Jennifer, 161                  LaFollette, Robert M., 217–218
Grassroots activism, 93, 148, 222        LaGro, James, 230–231
Green building, 77                       Lake City Corp. v. City of Mequon,
Greenbelt development, 28                     220–221
Greenberg, Michael, 8, 83                Land use advocacy organization, 222
Greenfield development, 5                Land Use in Central Indiana (LUCI)
Greenwald, Michael J., 6, 34, 47              model, 99, 101, 103, 107–111
Gross, David W., 10, 131–133             Land use constitution, 71
Growing Smart (APA), 223                 Land use planning, 49–50, 88, 95
Growth management policies, 7, 49,       Learning relationships, 59
    67                                   LeClear, Edward W., 10, 131–132
Growth vs. no growth debate, 4           Lindsey, Greg, 8, 95
                                         Live-Near-Your-Work Program, 24
                                         Local government comprehensive
Hamin, Elisabeth, 9, 117, 126                 planning, 70–72
Heritage area, 23                        Luther King (MLK) district case study;
Historic district designation, 175            see Martin Luther King (MLK)
Home ownership incentives, 208–209            district case study
Home-rule traditions, 117                Lyndhurst Foundation, 203, 209
Hooker, Michael, 184–185
Hoosier Farmland Preservation Task       Mandel Group, 41
     Force, 101                          Marineland, 71, 76
Housing stock, 40                        Martin, Alexiou and Bryson, 186
                                         Martin Luther King (MLK) district case
Indiana Land Resources Council (ILRC),       study, 199–214
      96–101, 103–106, 110, 112           background on, 201
Indiana Land Use Consortium (ILUC), 9,    campus expansion, 208
      96–101, 103, 105, 110, 112          challenges of, 206–211
Indiana Land Use on the Edge, 97          children’s center, 209
Indiana University-Purdue University,     elementary schools and, 205, 209
      Indianapolis (IUPUI), 96            faculty, staff, and student engagement,
Infographics Lab, 53                           205–206
Inner-city neighborhoods, 4, 7            funding, 208–209
Institutional support, 61                 goals and guiding principles of, 202
Interdisciplinary studies, 67, 77–78      home ownership incentives, 208–209
Intergovernmental agreements, 55          implementation overview, 203–204
246   INDEX


Martin Luther King (MLK) district case     Milwaukee freeway demolition case
     study (contineud)                         study (continued)
 lack of infrastructure, 209–210            university-community partnership, 38,
 lessons of collaboration, 211–213               45–47
 literature, research, and data, 201–202   Mini grants, 160
 new opportunities, 214                    Minnesota Design Team, 166
 ongoing urban redevelopment,              Montrose Heritage Greenway, 137, 142
       200–201                             Moore, T., 60, 62
 program activity, planning, and           Morgan, Michael, 39
       collaboration, 201–202              Morgridge Center for Public Service,
 program implementation, 202–206               218
 property acquisition, 207                 Morrill Act of 1862, 150
 resident mistrust/suspicion of motives,   Morris, Jeremy, 10, 165
       207–208                             Morsicato, Eric, 27–30, 33
 residential infill, 204, 208–209          Municipality, 23
 sewer/storm-water run-off, 210
 streetscaping, 210–211                    National Center for Neighborhood and
 traffic patterns, 210                          Brownfields Redevelopment, 83
Maryland’s Critical Area Act (1984), 22,    overview of, 83–84, 86–87
     28                                    National Congress for the New
Massachusetts community preservation            Urbanism, 129
     case study, 117–130                   National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
 Community Preservation Institute,              System (NPDES) program, 186
       117–121                             National Wildlife Federation, 66
 feedback, evaluation, and changes,        Natural areas, 4
       124–128                             Nederveld Associates, 148
 institutional challenges and outcomes,    New Jersey’s smart growth case studies
       128–129                              designated centers, 84
 program design and implementation,         future applications of, 93–94
       120–124                              GIS model, 89–91
Mayer, Henry, 8, 83                         project implementation, 87–89
Michigan State University (MSU); see        reflections on, 92–93
     United Growth: West Michigan case      smart growth strategy, 84–85
     study                                  Somerset County area, 85–87
Milwaukee freeway demolition case           zoning and planning impacts, 89–91
     study, 34                             Norquist, John, 39, 219
 attracting development, 41
 challenges of, 44–45                      Ohm, Brian W., 12, 14, 216, 231
 issues of, 35–37                          1000 Friends of Wisconsin, 222, 225, 229
 plan objectives, 40                       Open space preservation, 131, 159
 planning-learning feedback process,       Orfield, Myron, 150–151
       39–40                               Organizational partnerships, 57
 program activity planning and             Ottensmann, John, 8, 95
       collaboration, 37–39
 smart growth outcomes, 40–44              Palmer, Jamie, 8, 95
 smarter transportation, 42–44             Park, Joe, 13
                                                                       INDEX 247


Park, Peter, 6, 34, 37–39, 44–47          Planning Wisconsin, 219–220
Parker, Robert, 7, 49                     Plein, Christopher, 10, 165
Parkland, 65                              Political interference, 66
Partnerships, 52, 62                      Postindustrial rural setting, 166
Patton, C. V., 61                         Problem-driven projects, 38
Pedestrian environment, 40, 43, 93, 211   Professional practice, 57
Pennsylvania’s rural landscape            Progressive Era, 217
     conservation case study, 131–146     Project development phase, 52
 barriers and challenges of, 138          Property acquisition, 207–208
 challenges of, 143                       Property rights, 95
 Clean and Green program, 140             Purchase of Development Rights
 community-university resources and            programs, 156, 160–161
       roles, 135–137
 conservation planning and, 138–140       Quality control, 62
 issues for replication, 145              Quality of life issues, 4
 lessons of, 140–141
 local impacts, 142–143                   Renewal plan, 41
 operational issues, 141–142              Research centers, smart growth at, 8–9
 outcomes, 142–143                        Residential infill, 204, 208–209
 planning techniques, 137–138             Richmond, Henry, 150
 process and goals, 134–135               Ridge Economic Agricultural Partners
 program activity implementation,             (REAP), 154
       135–138                            Rogers Tavern, 20–21, 29
 program planning and collaboration,      Rose (Edward L.) Conservancy (ELRC),
       131–134                                131, 134–140, 142, 144
 results and assessment of, 144–145       Rozek, Allison, 47
 smart growth and, 138–140                Rural communities, 52, 134, 140–141;
 transferability, 145                         see also Pennsylvania’s rural
 university impacts, 143                      landscape conservation case study
People and Land project, 151              Rural Legacy Act, 23
Perry, Meredith, 11, 199                  Rusk, David, 150–151
Perryville case study, 17–33              Ryan, Robert, 123
 Community Planning Studio course,
       18–21                              Sawicki, D. S., 61
 findings and recommendations of, 25–26   Schaerer, John, 11, 199
 lessons learned from, 32–33              Service education, 65, 79
 main issues of, 20–21                    Service-learning program, 58–59
 report’s utility, 29–30                  Sewer run-off, 210
 sensitive areas and, 23                  Shea, Cindy, 195
 smart growth law and, 22–23              Sierra Club, 66
 Start Growth Initiatives, 23–24          Silka, Linda, 9, 117
 student reactions to, 30–32              Skilling, Mary Ann, 27
 students’ tasks, 21–22                   Skole, David, 149
 utilization of the report, 26–30         Smart growth, 3, 216; see also specific
 zoning ordinances, 28–29                      case studies
Planning decisions, 117                    at research centers, 8–9
248   INDEX


Smart growth (continued)                  Transportation, 189–190, 195
 collaboration and, 9–11                  Turner, Paul, 184
 community and, 11–12                     Tutterrow, Joseph, 8, 95
 the curriculum and, 6–7
 defined, 22                              United Growth: West Michigan case
 EPA’s principles of, 12–13                    study, 10, 147–162
 goals of, 131                             capacity building, 153–155
 smart growth dividend aid program,        citizen planner program, 159
       231–232                             community leadership and policy
 traditional neighborhood development            development, 155
       ordinances, 229–232                 Garfield Park Neighborhoods
 universities and, 3, 216–217                    Association (GPNA) project,
 zoning ordinances and, 222                      156–157
Smart Growth America, 6                    key projects, 156–161
Smart Growth Network, 24                   mini grants, 160
Smart Growth for Perryville, 25–26         open space preservation, 159
Smith-Lever Act, 150                       organizational history of, 150–152
Social justice, 142                        primary goals of, 147–148
Solitare, Laura, 8, 83                     project partners, 162–164
Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning      public education, 152–153
     Commission (SEWRPC), 42               Purchase of Development Rights
Special zoning district, 193                     programs, 160–161
Sprawl issues, 4–5, 147                    results of, 161–162
 West Michigan case, 148–150               rural committee, 147
Stacy, Bill, 208, 213                      success of, 151
State government, 56–57                    “This Land is Your Land” Learning
Storm-water retention/run-off, 191–192,          Series, 157–159
     210                                   three-tier approach, 152–155
Strawser, Chuck, 231                       university partnering of, 151
Streetscaping, 210–211                     urban committee, 147
Student researchers, 59–60                 urban sprawl, 148–150
Suburban growth, 4                        University-community partnerships, 3, 5,
                                               11, 38; see also Community
Tanner, Mary, 203                              Planning Workshop (CPW) case
“This Land is Your Land” Learning              study; Smart growth
     Series, 157–159                       comprehensive efforts of, 212
Thompson, Tommy, 12, 219, 224              defining success, 46
Thorsten, Richard, 11, 183                 dual mission of, 58–59
Time management, 62                        faculty and students, 58
Townsend, Carol L., 10, 147                funding of, 55
Traditional neighborhood development       importance of, 213
     ordinances, 229–231                   as joint enterprise, 212
Traffic patterns, 210                      lessons of, 61–63
Trail development, 177                     organizational partnerships, 57
Transfer-of-development rights (TDR)       power of, 56–59
     program, 28, 139                      role of, 4–12
                                                                       INDEX 249


University-community partnerships           University of Oregon, Community
     (continued)                                Planning Workshop (CPW), 7, 49–63
 service-learning program, 58–59            University outreach, 165
 student researchers, 59–60                 University-stakeholder collaborations,
 university as protected environment,           98–99
       45–46                                University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
 UWM-City of Milwaukee linkages,                case study; see King district case
       45–47                                    study
University of Florida Conservation          University of Wisconsin-Madison,
     Clinic, 64–69                              217–218, 227
 clinic-client relationships, 78–79         University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
 downtown redevelopment, 73–76                  (UWM), School of Architecture and
 green building, 77                             Urban Planning (SARUP), 34–47
 interdisciplinary collaboration,           Urban General Plan, The (Kent), 224
       problems of, 77–78                   Urban growth; see also Smart growth
 local government comprehensive              decisions and practices of, 3
       planning, 70–72                       development and, 4
 methodology and pedagogy, 68–70             growth vs. no growth debate, 4
 origins and development of, 57–70          Urban growth boundaries (UGBs), 51
 small basin watershed planning, 72–73      Urban Land Institute, 24
 smart growth projects, 70–79               Urban sprawl, in West Michigan, 148–150
 urban wetland mitigation, 72–73            Urban transit-oriented development
University of Maryland, Community               node, 43
     Planning Studio case study, 17–33
University of North Carolina at Chapel      Van Hise, Charles R., 218
     Hill case study, 183–198               Vergennes Township (Mich.), 159
 campus master plan, 183–184,               Village green, 184
       195–196
 citizen and stakeholder participation,     Waldorf, Rosemary, 198
       192                                  Walkable Communities, 155
 community of, 183–185                      Wastewater, 88
 development of master plan, 185–192        Watershed planning, 65, 72–73, 88
 development ordinance, 192–195             Weinstein, Janet, 69
 distinctive university settings, 190–191   West Michigan Strategic Alliance, 151
 environmentally sensitive areas, 191–192   West Virginia Community Design Team
 growth challenges, 183–187                      (CDT) case study, 10–11, 165–179
 mix land uses, 190                          community collaborative process, 170
 natural open space, 191                     intermediate goals, 169
 on-campus housing, 189                      long-term goals, 169
 public consideration, 193                   program activities, 171–172
 smart growth principles and objectives,     program implementation, 168–171
       186–192                               program origins, approaches, and
 to promote campus infill, 187–189                evolution, 166–168
 transportation alternatives, 189–190        results of, 177–178
 walkability on campus, 190                  short-term goals, 169
 zoning ordinances, 194                      smart growth principles, 172–177
250   INDEX


 West Virginia Community Design Team        Wisconsin smart growth case
       (CDT) case study (continued)              study (continued)
 success and failures of, 171–172           nature of collaboration, 226
Wetlands, 17, 72–75                         outcomes, 226–232
Weygand, Sharon, 19, 27, 30                 program activity implementation,
Wiesing, James J., 153                           223–226
Wills, Kendra C., 10, 147                   program activity planning and
Wilson, James Q., 213                            collaboration, 221–223
Wilson, Jeffrey, 8, 95                      smart growth dividend aid
Wisconsin Builders Association, 221, 223         program, 231–232
Wisconsin Idea, 217–221                     traditional neighborhood
Wisconsin Land Council, 220                      development ordinances,
Wisconsin Realtors Association (WRA),            229–231
     221–223, 225–226                       Wisconsin Idea context, 217–218
Wisconsin smart growth case study,         Wispark LLC, 41
     216–233                               Witzling, Larry, 37
 challenges of, 228
 comprehensive planning, 226–228           Yale University Clinic, 66
 fourteen planning goals, 225
 land use issue, 218–221                   Zoning, 25, 28, 41, 71, 89–92, 122, 222

								
To top