Who built Irvine? Private planning and the federal government

Urban Studies

Volumn 39, Issue 13, 2002, Pages 2507-2530

  Forsyth, Ann ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NEW TOWN; PLANNING PROCESS; PRIVATE SECTOR; URBAN PLANNING;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 3142738528     PISSN: 00420980     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0042098022000027086     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. ALLISON, G. and ZELIKOW, P. (1999) Essence of Decision. New York: Longman.
2. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS (1968) American New Towns: An Uncomprehensive List. Washington, DC: AIA.
3. BANZHAF, M. (1980) Letter to Carlyle Hall, Center for Law in the Public Interest, Re Orange County Fair Housing Council vs. The City of Irvine, OC Super Ct No. 225824, July 11. UC Irvine, Orange County Collection.
4. BLOOM, N. (2001) Suburban Alchemy: 1960s New Towns and the Transformation of the American Dream. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
5. BLOOM, N. (forthcoming) The federal Icarus: the public rejection of 1970s national suburban planning, The Journal of Urban History.
6. BRECKENFELD, G. (1971) Columbia and the New Cities. New York: Washburn.
7. BROWER, M. (1994) The Irvine Ranch: A Time for People. Newport Beach, CA: Orange County Report.
8. BURBY, R. (1976) Recreation and Leisure in New Communities. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
9. BURBY, R. and WEISS, S. (1976) New Communities USA. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
10. BURCHELL, R. ET AL. (1998) The costs of sprawl revisited. Transit Cooperative Research Program Report No. 39. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Washington, DC; National Academy Press.
11. BURCHELL, R., LISTOKIN, D. and GALLEY, C. (1999) Smart growth: more than a ghost of urban policy past, less than a bold new horizon, in: FANNIE MAE FOUNDATION (Ed.) Legacy of the 1949 Housing Act: Past, Present, and Future of Federal Housing and Urban Policy. Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation.
12. CAMERON, D. (1979, edited 1980) An overview of the Irvine Company General Plan for the City of Irvine Staff (mimeograph).
13. CARLINER, M. (1998) Development of Federal homeownership "policy", Housing Policy Debate 9(2), pp. 299-321.
14. CHARLES LUCKMAN ASSOCIATES (1959) University of California Site Selection Study: A Report on the Search for New Campus Sites, Southern California Metropolitan Center Section, South Cross Section. Los Angeles: Charles Luckman Associates.
15. CHECKOWAY, B. (1980) Large builders, federal housing programmes, and postwar suburbanization, International Journal of Urban and. Regional Research, 4(1), pp. 21-45.
16. CHRISTENSEN, K. (1999) Cities and Complexity: Making Intergovernmental Decisions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17. CITY OF IRVINE (2002) City website (http://www.cityofirvine.org/about/ demographics.asp).
18. CLELAND, R. (1962) The Irvine Ranch. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library.
19. COMMUNITY RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT (1964) Columbia: A New Town for Howard County. 16 page newspaper-style publication. 12 November (author's collection).
20. DIENSTFREY, T. (1971) Moral issues in new town development, in: S. WEISS, E. KAISER, and R. BURBY (Eds) New Community Development, pp. 195-246. Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Urban and Regional Studies.
21. EICHLER, E. and KAPLAN, M. (1967) The Community Builders. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
22. EVANS, H. and RODWIN, L. (1979) The new towns program and why it failed, Public Interest, 56(Summer), pp. 90-107.
23. EWING, R. (1991) Developing Successful New Communities. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
24. FAINSTEIN, S. (1994) The City Builders. Oxford: Blackwell.
25. FISHMAN, R. (1999) The American metropolis at century's end: past and future influences, in: FANNIE MAE FOUNDATION (Ed.) Legacy of the 1949 Housing Act: Past, Present, and Future of Federal Housing and Urban Policy. Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation.
26. FORBES (2002) World's richest people lists (http://www.forbes.com/ finance/lists/).
27. FORSYTH, A. (1999) Constructing Suburbs. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach.
28. FORSYTH, A. (2002) Columbia, Irvine, and The Woodlands: planning lessons from three US new towns of the 1960s and 1970s, Journal of the American Planning Association, (forthcoming).
29. FRIEDEN, B. (1995) The Urban policy legacy. Urban Affairs Review, 30(5), pp. 681-686.
30. FRUG, G. (1999) City Making. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31. GAO (GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES) (1999) Extent of federal influence on "urban sprawl" is unclear. Report No. 99-87, Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division. Washington, DC: GAO.
32. GAO (GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES) (2000) Local growth issues: federal opportunities and challenges. Report No. 00-178. Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division. Washington, DC: GAO.
33. GELFAND, M. (1975) A Nation of Cities: The Federal Government and Urban America, 1933-1965. New York: Oxford University Press.
34. GLICKMAN, N. (Ed.) (1980) The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
35. GRIFFIN, N. (1974) Irvine: The Genesis of a New Community. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
36. HALES, P. (1997) Atomic Spaces: Living on the Manhattan Project. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
37. HANCHETT, T. (1994) Federal incentives and the growth of local planning, 1941-48, Journal of the American Planning Association, 60(2), pp. 197-208.
38. HELLIS, W. (1970 interview, 1992 publication. Recollections of early Orange County and the Irvine Ranch, interview by S. Gould. Fullerton: Orange County Pioneer Council and California State University Oral History Program.
39. IRVINE COMPANY, THE (1970) Irvine General Plan. Irvine, OH: The Irvine Company.
40. IRVINE COMPANY, THE (2000) Irvine's housing: balanced best, Planning Ahead, May (http://www.irvineco.com/aboutus/pa_info/pa_index.asp).
41. IRVINE COMPANY, THE (2002) Irvine Ranch Land Reserve (http://www. irvineco.com/goodplanning/land_reserve/landreserve15.asp).
42. IRVINE SMITH, J. (1971) Speech given by Mrs Joan Irvine Smith before the Associated Students of the University of California, Irvine, December 7. UC Irvine Archives, Box 158, Folder 747-50-0.
43. JASNY, M. (1997) Leap of Faith: Southern California's Experiment in Natural Community Conservation Planning. Los Angeles, CA: Natural Resources Defense Council.
44. KANE, D. (1996) Westlake and Irvine, California: paradigms for the 21st century? PhD thesis, Santa Barbara: University of California, Santa Barbara.
45. KAPLAN, M. (1995) Urban policy: an uneven past, an uncertain future, Urban Affairs Review, 30(5), pp. 662-680.
46. KATO, Y. (2002) Defining and designing balanced communities: diversity, residential segregation and American new towns. MA paper, University of California, Irvine.
47. KATZ, B. (2000) The Federal role in curbing sprawl, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 572, pp. 66-77.
48. KREDITOR, A. and KRAEMER, K. (1968) Final Report: Southern Sector General Plan. May. Draft for TIC. UCI Orange County Collection.
49. LAMB, K. (1974) As Orange Goes: Twelve California Families and the Future of American Politics. New York: W. Norton.
50. MALECKI, E. (1982) Federal R and D spending in the United States of America: some impacts on metropolitan economics, Regional Studies, 16(1), pp. 19-35.
51. MARKUSEN, A. (1989) Regional planning and policy: an essay on the American exception. Working Paper No. 9, Center for Urban Policy Research, Piscataway, NJ.
52. MASON, W. R. (1971) Letter to County of Orange, Local Agency Formation Commission, 5 January. UC Irvine Orange County Collection.
53. MIELDS, H. (1973) Federally Assisted New Communities. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
54. MONKKONEN, E. (1988) America Become Urban: The Development of US Cities and Towns, 1780-1980. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
55. MUNIAC, D. and AUGER, D. (1995) The national government and US cities in the post-Reagan/Bush era, Regional Studies, 29(8), pp. 737-744.
56. NISHIMAKI, H. (2001) The making of Garden Cities: case studies of Milton Keynes, Irvine and Tskuba. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
57. NIVOLA, P. (1999) Laws of the Landscape: How Policies Shape Cities in Europe, and America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
58. OCTA (ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY) (2002) Centerline Project webpage (http://centerline.octa.net/).
59. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (1970) Staff Recommendations on the Land Use, Circulation and Housing Elements of the Central Section Irvine Ranch General Plan and the Proposed City of Irvine General Plan. For submission to the Orange County Planning Commission, December 17. UC Irvine Orange County Collection.
60. OWEN, W. (1959) Cities in the Motor Age. New York: The Viking Press.
61. PARKER, A. (1997) A Stealth urban policy in the US? Federal spending in five large metropolitan regions, 1984-1993, Urban Studies, 34(11), pp. 1831-1850.
62. POPPER, F. (1988) Understanding American land use regulation since 1970, Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(3), pp. 291-301.
63. SCHIESL, M. (1991) Designing the model community: The Irvine Company and suburban development, 1950-88, in: R. KLING ET AL. (Eds.) Postsuburban California, pp. 55-91. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
64. SCOTT, A. (1993) Technopolis: High-technology Industry and Regional Development in Southern California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
65. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (1977) Settlement Agreement Among all the Parties of Orange County Fair housing et al. V. City of Irvine et al., Orange County Super. Ct. No. 225824. UC Irvine, Orange County Collection.
66. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA STUDIES CENTER, USC (2001) Sprawl Hits the Wall. Los Angeles, CA: Southern California Studies Center and Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
67. STEINER, F. (1981) The Politics of New Town Planning. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
68. TAYLOR, B. (2000) When finance leads planning: urban planning, highway planning, and metropolitan freeways in California, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20(2), pp. 196-214.
69. US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (1984) An Evaluation of the Federal New Communities Program. Washington, DC: Department of Housing and Urban Development.
70. US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (1998) A picture of subsidized households datasets (http://www.huduser.org/datasets/assthsg/ statedata98/index.html).
71. US POSTAL SERVICE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS DIVISION (1973) New Towns and the US Postal Service: Some Guidelines for Postal Officials and New Town Developers. Washington, DC: US Postal Service.
72. US/USSR NEW TOWNS WORKING GROUP (1981) Planning New Towns: National Reports of the US and USSR. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of International Affairs.
73. WATSON, R. (1973) The changing role of the private developer. An address by Raymond Watson, President, The Irvine Company, to the 7th Pan American Congress, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, San Francisco, 25 September. Transcript, UC Irvine Orange County Collection.
74. WILLIAM L. PEREIRA AND ASSOCIATES (1959) A preliminary report for a university community development in Orange County. October. UCI Archives. Los Angeles: William L. Pereira and Associates.
75. WILLIAM L. PEREIRA and ASSOCIATES (1960) Second phase report for a university-community development in Orange County. Prepared for The Irvine Company. May. UCI Archives. Los Angeles: William L. Pereira and Associates.
76. WILLIAM L. PEREIRA and ASSOCIATES (1963) Long range development plan, University of California, Irvine. William L. Pereira and Associates.
77. WILLIAM L. PEREIRA and ASSOCIATES (1964a) A guide to the master plan for the southern sector of the Irvine Ranch as presented to the Orange County Planning Commission on January 15, 1964. UC Irvine Archives, 535-1.
78. WILLIAM L. PEREIRA and ASSOCIATES (1964b) Master plan submittal. UC Irvine Archives, 535-1.