Do local development outcomes follow voluntary regional plans?: Evidence from sacramento Region's Blueprint Plan

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 81, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 104-120

  Allred, Dustin ^a   Chakraborty, Arnab ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

growth management; plan evaluation; regional planning; visioning; voluntary governance

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY; ECONOMIC GROWTH; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; METROPOLITAN AREA; REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT; REGIONAL PLANNING; URBAN PLANNING; VOLUNTARY APPROACH;

CALIFORNIA; SACRAMENTO; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84954181517     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2015.1067574     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Baer, W. C. (1997). General plan evaluation criteria: An approach to making better plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 63(3), 329-344. doi:10.1080/01944369708975926
2. Barbour, E. (2002). Metropolitan growth planning in California, 1900-2000. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
3. Barbour, E., & Deakin, E. A. (2012). Smart growth planning for climate protection: Evaluating Californias Senate Bill 375. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(1), 70-86. doi:10.1080/01944363.20 11.645272
4. Barbour, E., & Teitz, M. B. (2006). Blueprint planning in California: Forging consensus on metropolitan growth and development. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
5. Bartholomew, K., & Ewing, R. (2009). Land use-Transportation scenarios and future vehicle travel and land consumption: A metaanalysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(1), 13-27. doi:10.1080/01944360802508726
6. Basolo, V., & Hastings, D. (2003). Obstacles to regional housing solutions: A comparison of four metropolitan areas. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(4), 449-472. doi:10.1111/1467-9906.00172
7. Blomley, N. K. (2004). Unsettling the city: Urban land and the politics of property. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
8. Brueckner, J. K. (2000). Urban sprawl: Diagnosis and remedies. International Regional Science Review, 23(2), 160-171. doi:10.1177/016001700761012710
9. California Air Resources Board. (n.d.). Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. Retrieved from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm
10. California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions. (2013). CALAFCO. Retrieved from http://www.calafco.org/
11. Campoy, A. (2008, July 7). With gas over $4, cities explore whether its smart to be dense. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121538754733231043
12. Chakraborty, A. (2010). Scenario planning for effective regional governance: Promises and limitations. State and Local Government Review, 42(2), 156-167. doi:10.1177/0160323X10377344
13. County should reject Cordova Hills [Editorial]. (2012, November 18). The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/18/4992523/county-should-reject-cordova-hills.html
14. Daniels, M. (2012, February 2). Letter to the editor-Elk Grove expansion is needed. The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from http://www. sacbee.com/2012/02/02/v-print/4235310/
15. Dierwechter, Y. (2008). Urban growth management and its discontents: Promises, practices, and geopolitics in US city-regions. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
16. Eisberg, J. (2007). Building a regional voice: Stakeholder perceptions of the Sacramento Area Council of Governments Blueprint Initiative. Berkeley Planning Journal, 20(1), 97-119. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8jw0503f
17. Fischler, R. (2000).communicative planning theory: A Foucauldian assessment. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 19(4), 358-368. doi:10.1177/0739456X0001900405
18. Foster, K. A. (1997). The political economy of special-purpose government. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
19. Foster, K. A. (2011). A region of ones own. In E. Seltzer & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Regional planning in America: Practice and prospect (pp. 55-82). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
20. Foster, K. A. (2012). Resilience capacity index. Retrieved from http://brr. berkeley.edu/rci/
21. Frick, K. T. (2013). The actions of discontent: Tea Party and property rights activists pushing back against regional planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 79(3), 190-200. doi:10.1080/01944363.2013.885312
22. Gearin, E. (2004). Smart growth or smart growth machine? The smart growth movement and its implications. In J. R. Wolch, M. Pastor, & P. Dreier (Eds.), Up against the sprawl: Public policy and the making of Southern California (pp. 279-307). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
23. Gibbs, J. P., & Martin, W. T. (1962). Urbanization, technology, and the division of labor: International patterns. American Sociological Review, 27(5), 667-677. Retrieved from http://www.asanet.org/journals/asr/american-sociological-review.cfm
24. Goetz, A. (2013). Suburban sprawl or urban centres: Tensions and contradictions of smart growth approaches in Denver, Colorado. Urban Studies, 50(11), 2178-2195. doi:10.1177/0042098013478238
25. Gordon, P., & Richardson, H. W. (1997). Are compact cities a desirable planning goal? Journal of the American Planning Association, 63(1), 95-106. doi:10.1080/01944369708975727
26. Hall, P. (2002). Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
27. Handy, S., & McCann, B. (2010). The regional response to federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects. Journal of the American Planning Association, 77(1), 23-38. doi:10.1080/01944363.2011.526537
28. Healy, P. (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. Vancouver, BC, Canada: University of British Columbia Press.
29. Helling, A. (1998). Collaborative visioning: Proceed with caution! Results from evaluating Atlantas Vision 2020 Project. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(3), 335-349. doi:10.1080/01944369808975990
30. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
31. Innes, J. E., Booher, D. E., & Di Vittorio, S. (2010). Strategies for megaregion governance. Journal of the American Planning Association, 77(1), 55-67. doi:10.1080/01944363.2011.533640
32. Jacobs, H. M. (1999). Who owns America? Social confl ict over property rights. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
33. Jonas, A. E. G., & Pincetl, S. (2006). Rescaling regions in the state: The new regionalism in California. Political Geography, 25(5), 482-505. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.02.002
34. Knaap, G. J., & Lewis, R. (2011). Regional planning for sustainability and hegemony of metropolitan regionalism. In E. Seltzer & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Regional planning in America: Practice and prospect (pp. 176-221). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
35. Krueger, R., & Gibbs, D. (2008). "Third wave" sustainability? Smart growth and regional development in the USA. Regional Studies, 42(9), 1263-1274. doi:10.1080/00343400801968403
36. Marlay, M., & Gardner, T. K. (2010, August). Identifying concentrations of employment in metropolitan areas. Presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Atlanta, GA.
37. Norris, D. F. (2001). Prospects for regional governance under the new regionalism: Economic imperatives versus political impediments. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23(5), 557-571. doi:10.1111/0735-2166.00106
38. Orfield, M. (2002). American metropolitics: The new suburban reality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
39. OToole, R. (2007, July 9). Debunking Portland: The city that doesnt work. Policy Analysis (No. 596). Retrieved from http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-596.pdf
40. Pendall, R., Rosenbloom, S., Levy, D. K., Oo, E., Knaap, G., Chakraborty, A., & Sartori, J. (2013). Can federal efforts advance federal and local de-siloing. Lessons from the HUD-EPA-DOT Partnership for Sustainable Communities. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/publications/412820.html
41. Pogodzinski, J. M. (1991). The effects of fiscal and exclusionary zoning on household location: A critical review. Journal of Housing Research, 2(2), 145-160. Retrieved from http://aresjournals.org/loi/jhor
42. Quigley, J. M., & Rosenthal, L. A. (2005). The effects of land use regulation on the price of housing: What do we know? What can we learn? Cityscape, 8(1), 69-137. Retrieved from http://www.huduser.org/periodicals/cityscpe/vol8num1/ch3.pdf
43. Rosan, C. (2007). Metropolitan governance and local land use planning in Boston, Denver, and Portland. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
44. Ruth, M. (2006). Smart growth and climate change: Regional development, infrastructure and adaptation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
45. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2008). MTP/SCS 2035: Blueprint for sustainable communities. Retrieved from http://www.sacog. org/2035/
46. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2010). Special Report: Blueprints impact on the region and residents quality of life. Retrieved from http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/adopted/
47. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2013a). About the Blueprint. Retrieved from http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/
48. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2013b). Implementing the Blueprint. Retrieved from http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/
49. Savitch, H. V., & Vogel, R. K. (2000). Introduction: Paths to new regionalism. State & Local Government Review, 32(3), 158-168. doi:10.1177/0160323X0003200301
50. Sears, D. O., & Citrin, J. (1982). Tax revolt: Something for nothing in California. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Self, R. O. (2003). American Babylon: Race and the struggle for postwar Oakland. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52. Stephens, J. (2012, March 15). Sacramento region SCS builds on tradition of Blueprint planning (California Planning & Development Report). Retrieved from http://www.cp-dr.com/node/3152
53. Stodghill, R., & Bower, A. (2002, August 25). Welcome to Americas most diverse city. Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0, 8599, 340694, 00.html
54. Talen, E., & Koschinsky, J. (2011). Is subsidized housing in sustainable neighborhoods? Evidence from Chicago. Housing Policy Debate, 21(1), 1-28. doi:10.1080/10511482.2010.533618
55. Wheeler, S. M. (2002). The new regionalism: Key characteristics of an emerging movement. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), 267-278. doi:10.1080/01944360208976272
56. Wheeler, S. M., & Beebe, C. W. (2011). The rise of the postmodern metropolis: Spatial evolution of the Sacramento Metropolitan Region. Journal of Urban Design, 16(3), 307-332. doi:10.1080/13574809.2011. 572253
57. While, A., Jonas, A. E. G., & Gibbs, D. (2004). The environment and the entrepreneurial city: Searching for the urban "sustainability fix" in Manchester and Leeds. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(3), 549-569. doi:10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00535.x
58. Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association-LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27(2), 93-115. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.1995.tb00338.x
59. Foster, K. A. (2011). A region of ones own. In E. Seltzer & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Regional planning in America: Practice and prospect (pp. 55-82). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
60. Orfield, M. (2002). American metropolitics: The new suburban reality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
61. Páez, A., & Scott, D. M. (2005). Spatial statistics for urban analysis: A review of techniques with examples. GeoJournal, 61(1), 53-67. doi:10.1007/s10708-005-0877-5
62. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2013). About the Blueprint. Retrieved from http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/
63. University of California, Berkeley. (2008). Statewide database. Retrieved from http://statewidedatabase.org/index.html
64. U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). North American industry classification system (NAICS). Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/