Hope for new communities as an alternative to sprawl?: Insights from developer perceptions of amenities in future new communities in the U.S. and U.K

Buckman, Stephen; Trivers, Ian; Kayanan, Carla Maria; Black, Tristan

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.10.036

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other drivers of master-planned development in exurbia include economies of scale in development, lower land costs, and less Not in My Back Yard (NIMBY)-ism compared with urban and suburban development (Tilt and Cerveny 2013). A major driver of master-planned community development is home-buyer demand for amenities (Buckman et al 2017;Heid 2004;Tilt and Cerveny 2013). The literature identifies the draw of several types of amenities, including rural, recreational, and cultural (Buckman et al 2017;Gosnell and Abrams 2011;Lekies et al 2015).…”

Section: Planning Land-use and Spatial Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A major driver of master-planned community development is home-buyer demand for amenities (Buckman et al 2017;Heid 2004;Tilt and Cerveny 2013). The literature identifies the draw of several types of amenities, including rural, recreational, and cultural (Buckman et al 2017;Gosnell and Abrams 2011;Lekies et al 2015). Although much of the research indicates that exurbanites seek rural amenities (Cadieux and Hurley 2011;Crump 2003;Davis, Nelson, and Dueker 1994;Vogt and Marans 2004;Wang et al 2012), this picture is complicated by other data, such as Johnson's (2008) finding that privacy and space matter more than a rural lifestyle for exurban residents, and Nelson and Sanchez's (1997) finding that suburbanites and exurbanites demonstrate similar household characteristics.…”

Section: Planning Land-use and Spatial Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Political Ecology of Exurbia in the Sunbelt: Lessons from an Award-Winning, “Unworkable” Plan

Linkous

2017

Urban Affairs Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sarasota County, Florida's award-winning Sarasota 2050 plan established the county as a leader in smart growth. The plan promotes a system of clustered development and open space as an alternative to sprawl beyond Sarasota's growth boundary. Although adopted in 2002, by 2011, no projects had broken ground under the plan, which critics deemed "unworkable." This article presents a case study of exurban political ecology in Sarasota to provide insight into the derailment of a promising strategy for managing exurban growth. Sarasota 2050's policies were undermined by extra-local factors, including the recession and reduced state oversight of planning, and by incompatible policy agendas pursued by local interest groups. Also problematic was the plan's cluster approach-a spatial strategy that rationalizes large landowner, planning, and conservation interests, but does little to address rural restructuring. The case points to the need for new planning strategies that mediate competing interests in exurbia.

show abstract