2011
DOI: 10.18848/2154-8676/cgp/v01i02/53784
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Mis/Alignments of Exurban Land Use Controls with the Preferences of Varied Development Interest Groups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The HSIPR Program needs to go further and call for liberalization of local land use controls, rather than bloating the zoning codebook with new TOD rules. In doing so, the program will encourage compact, pedestrian and train station-oriented development by simply allowing developers to build tall, build mixed use, and build without setback minima and footprint maxima (Levine and Inam, 2004;Levine, 2005;Johnson, 2011). Developers merely need freedom to build TOD through liberalization of local land use controls, not planning mandates to do so (Levine, 2005;Johnson, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The HSIPR Program needs to go further and call for liberalization of local land use controls, rather than bloating the zoning codebook with new TOD rules. In doing so, the program will encourage compact, pedestrian and train station-oriented development by simply allowing developers to build tall, build mixed use, and build without setback minima and footprint maxima (Levine and Inam, 2004;Levine, 2005;Johnson, 2011). Developers merely need freedom to build TOD through liberalization of local land use controls, not planning mandates to do so (Levine, 2005;Johnson, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%