Major land uses in the United States


1974 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-133
Author(s):  
Frederic O. Sargent

Since its emergence in the early part of this century, planning in the United States has been predominantly urban. Regional planning of watersheds, has received some attention but planning for rural areas has not been widely practiced, nor has it been taught in planning schools. Support for this generalization may be found in planning texts which consider 50,000 population a “small” municipality. Further evidence is found in town plans prepared through support of federal “701” funds during the past decade. These plans are usually for expansion of urban facilities and services and ignore exclusively rural land uses. Planning in England presents a contrast. It is appropriately referred to as “town and country planning” as it covers the range of land use intensities from agricultural to the highest value urban block as interrelated and interconnected parts of a single fabric.



2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliana Maantay

Zoning laws determine what types of land uses and densities can occur on each property lot in a municipality, and therefore also govern the range of potential environmental and health impacts resulting from the land use. Zoning regulations are the most ubiquitous of the land use laws in the United States, as well as in many other countries. As such, they have far-reaching effects on the location of noxious uses, and any concomitant environmental or human health impacts.Zoning has enormous implications, in general, for shaping our environment, and because changes to zoning are made through a political process, it has possibilities for abuse. One zoning expert stated:I suppose what really disturbs me is that because zoning is the most universal of the legal tools for shaping the character of the municipality, any unwise use of the process has a far greater impact upon our national character than does the abuse of a less widely employed device.



2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 466-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
James A. Falcone ◽  
David W. Wong


Author(s):  
Daren Harmel ◽  
Steve Potter ◽  
Pamela Casebolt ◽  
Ken Reckhow ◽  
Colleen Green ◽  
...  


1994 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
S S Fainstein

Since the economic crisis of the mid-1970s, urban governments in the United States and Great Britain have used programs to stimulate office development as their main vehicle for encouraging economic growth. Two cases of government-sponsored redevelopment are compared: Spitalfields in East London and downtown Brooklyn, New York. Both are in impoverished peripheral areas and involve the creation of large projects that require a transformation of land uses; each involves the activity of a public-private partnership. Despite some differences in types of governmental activity that result from different ideological and institutional traditions, the elements of the two projects are strikingly alike.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document