Promoting “Orderly and Sound Growth”: 1960s Debates Over Administering Public Transportation in Service of Mobility or Regional Planning

2021 ◽  
pp. 009614422110145
Author(s):  
Yonah Freemark

This article reconstructs debates within the Kennedy and Johnson administrations regarding the management of U.S. public transportation. Should transit be treated as a component of the mobility system, or as a tool of land-use planning? In the midst of jurisdictional battles triggered by the formation of two new departments, officials fiercely disagreed about this question and adapted their practices to gain the upper hand. I document how interest in organizing metropolitan growth and concerns about destructive road projects helped justify national housing agencies managing transit programs beginning in 1961. But Congress shifted them to the Department of Transportation in 1968. This was due, I argue, to lingering racist, anti-urban sentiments about housing-agency programs benefiting low-income people and transportation officials previously focused on highways devoting newfound attention to multimodal projects. Despite a fleeting moment of attention to regional land-use and transportation policy, this change ultimately bifurcated and diminished federal planning oversight.

1979 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. DUMANSKI ◽  
E. C. HUFFMAN ◽  
I. B. MARSHALL

A procedure is outlined for analyzing soil data for regional land use planning. Maps of basic land factor limitations are illustrated for the Ottawa urban fringe, and each map is evaluated for biological and nonbiological uses. The major land factors relative to urbanization are used along with other data to derive an urban "suitability" map. Results are compared to the regional development plan for the area.


1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 293-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
António S. Câmara ◽  
António P. Mano ◽  
M. Graça Martinho ◽  
M.Paula Marques ◽  
João F. Nunes ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Marlon Boarnet ◽  
Randall C. Crane

There has been a boom in American rail transit construction in the past two decades. That new investment has prompted the question of what planners can do to support rail transit. One popular answer has been transit-oriented development (TOD), increasingly described as a comprehensive strategy for rail-based land-use planning throughout an urban area. This is most clearly illustrated by Bernick and Cervero’s (1997) description of how such projects can link together to create “transit metropolises” where rail is a viable transportation option for many of the region’s residents. In addition, TOD provides an opportunity to examine the regulatory issues discussed in chapter 6, both because it is an explicit attempt to use urban design as transportation policy and because the intergovernmental issues are especially stark in relation to these developments. Having discussed how travelers behave in the first part of this book, we now ask what we know about how cities behave. Stated in general form, the question is rather broad. It concerns the process by which cities and other land-use authorities decide where to put streets, how to structure the local hierarchy of streets, when to develop more or less densely, how to position employment centers relative to residential areas, and so on. Still, the feasibility of land-use plans with transportation goals depends critically on how such authorities behave. Any discussion of the effectiveness of these strategies must address both how communities plan for transportation and how travelers respond to those plans. The primary transportation goal of TOD generally, as currently practiced, is to coordinate land-use policies to support rail transit. In particular, focusing both residential and commercial development near rail transit stations is aimed at increasing rail ridership (e.g., Bernick, 1990; Bernick and Hall, 1990; Calthorpe, 1993; Cervero, 1993; Bernick and Cervero, 1997). Some evidence suggests that residents near rail transit stations are two to five times more likely to commute by rail when compared with persons living elsewhere in the same urban area (Pushkarev and Zupan, 1977; Bernick and Carroll, 1991; Cervero, 1994d).


2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (03n04) ◽  
pp. 2050005
Author(s):  
Mariana Barreto Alfonso Fragomeni ◽  
Jennifer L. Rice ◽  
Rosanna G. Rivero ◽  
J. Marshall Shepherd

Barriers to the application of climate science in land use planning are often understood as a problem related to perceived disciplinary knowledge gaps. This paper argues that, instead, limitations to the application of knowledge are not strictly linked to transference, but are also attributed to the thought processes that planners use to understand and use information. This study uses an interactional co-production framework from Science and Technology Studies (STS) to explore these processes in the context of heat response planning in Chatham County, Georgia, in the United States: a coastal county exposed to hot and humid conditions that render its population, particularly its growing elderly and low-income, vulnerable to heat health risks. We specifically focus on the processes used by planners during a heat response planning workshop, exploring the discussions and actions taken to develop a plan. We attempt to answer the following questions: What are the processes used by planners to respond to climatic issues such as heat vulnerability? How do these processes determine the application of the scientific knowledge produced? How does this process enable or limit the use of climate knowledge in decision making at the city scale? This paper argues that planners engage in three steps to determine the applicability of climate knowledge to urban planning: (1) using their own experiences to contextualize and visualize the information in their community, (2) being extremely cautious about the use of information because of a fear of failure, and (3) asking for specific policies to be in place to justify and legitimate actions and promote projects throughout the city. Using these insights, this paper concludes with some thoughts on how climate knowledge might be better integrated into urban planning.


2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 3343
Author(s):  
James Gondwe ◽  
Mtafu Zeleza .A Manda ◽  
Dominic Kamlomo

This study examines how discriminatory land use planning predisposes the low income residents to flood disaster risks in Karonga town, Malawi. Using a qualitative research design, in-depth interviews were conducted with ten government and non government institutions engaged in land use planning and disaster risk management and traditional leaders. The study showed that theoretical aims of land use planning to improve the living environment remain partial and in certain cases exacerbate risks posed by floods because the planning tool divides the urban landscape into formal and informal spaces. Such separation which coincided with incomes levels forced the marginalised and urban poor to occupy flood-prone areas While literature on flood control promotes an integrated approach to flood risk management, land use planning practice is singled out as a regulatory measure which ironically not only fails to meet the needs, but also increases vulnerability to flood risks, of the urban poor residents. The study further revealed that land use planning has failed to reduce flood disaster risks in informal spaces because it is not compatible with the needs of the urban poor.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document