Smart Growth and Development Reality: The Difficult Co-ordination of Land Use and Transport Objectives

Abstract

A supportive distribution of residential density is perceived to be an essential component of strategies aimed at increasing the use of public transit. To alter substantially land use-transport dynamics in a fashion that favours public transit patronage, residential density policies must be deployed over long periods and unfold at local and metropolitan levels simultaneously. The article narrates policies that attempted, since the late 1950s, a juxtaposition of high residential density and quality public transit services in the Toronto metropolitan region. Findings highlight the difficulties of pursuing such policies due to the power of neighbourhood-based interests, disagreement among jurisdictions within the metropolitan region and changes in priorities and intervention capacity. The article ends with proposals that seek to enhance the possibility of transforming the structure and dynamics of cities in ways that are compatible with smart growth principles.

Rapidly Growing African Cities Need to Adopt Smart Growth Policies to Solve Urban Development Concerns

“…In a very broad sense, smart growth is a reaction to the sprawling form of urbanization characterized by low overall densities, unlimited outward and "leapfrogging" expansion of new development, a rigid specialization of land uses, and large-scale conversion of open space and environmentally sensitive lands to urban uses (Filion 2003;Filion and McSpurren 2007;Downs 2005; see Table 1). The concept calls for focusing future growth on existing built-up areas to establish a compact, efficient, and environmentally sensitive pattern of urban development that provides people with various transportation systems and a range of housing and employment choices.…”

Impacts of land use and amenities on public transport use, urban planning and design

“…With rapid urbanization, issues on urban sustainability and resilience have become more and more challenging to synergize with multiple, and sometimes opposing, objectives (Filion and McSpurren, 2007). As a consequence, it is essential to probe multiple urban indicators in a more systematic and holistic manner to capture various urban-related phenomena such as transport ridership and road traffic flow-those that are known to be measure, more so to control vis-à-vis urban planning.…”

The influence of transport infrastructures on land-use conversion decisions within municipal plans

“…According to this perspective, the market acts as a constraint force and public authorities struggle to fix its flaws and inefficiency (Munneke 2005, Wu and Cho 2007, Brueckner 1990). On the other hand, local resistance to densification in urban areas leads to the inability to enhance development in these areas in order to save peripheral ones (Searle 2007), acting in parallel with real estate and economic pressures on peripheral open spaces (Filion andMcSpurren 2007, Dumbaugh 2004). Parochialist planning is thus given a role that obstructs rising density within areas where TOD could be implemented.…”