Urban Containment –
American Style(s)
Dr. Arthur C. Nelson, FAICP
Professor & Director, Urban Affairs & Planning
Virginia Tech – Alexandria Center
Regional Leadership Institute
Urban Containment –
God’s Will?
“The Lord said to Moses . . . Command the people of
Israel, that they give to the Levites
. . . cities to dwell in; and pasture lands round about
the cities . . . The pasture lands of the cities . . . shall
reach from the wall of the city outward . . . all around.
“The city shall be in the middle…”
Numbers 35: 1-5.
Goals of Urban Containment
• Preserve public goods.
• Minimize adverse land use interactions and
maximize positive ones.
• Minimize taxpayer exposure.
• Distribute benefits & burdens equitably.
• Improve overall quality of life.
“Best” Containment Practices
• Urban Growth Containment Boundary
• Resource land preservation
• Infill, redevelopment, aka “refill”
• Inclusionary housing
• Regional asset sharing
• Multi-modal accessibility
• Responsiveness to change
Emerging Empirical Evidence
• Containment/growth management improves
economic development.
• Containment prevents beltways & increases
retail/service trade.
• Containment increases farming.
• Containment reduces racial segregation.
• Containment makes jobs more accessible to
low/mod-incomes.
• Containment eliminates blight.
Downsides
• Threatens existing neighborhoods.
• Raises housing prices by making area more
attractive & economically efficient.
• Can decrease homeownership (though just
the opposite can also happen).
• Increases infrastructure costs in near-term.
• Pushes some economic activities out.
• Reduces opportunity to live on large lots.
Different Flavors of Urban
Containment
• Urban Services & Facilities
• Urban Growth Phasing
• Rural Growth Management
• Rural/Open Space Preservation
• Intergovernmental Agreements
Urban Services & Facilities
• Urban Service Area
• Infrastructure Phasing
• Municipal Boundary
• Level of Service Standards
• Spatial Capital Investment
• Special Service Districts
• State Priority Funding Areas
Urban Service Area
• Limits geographic extent of service.
• Rural areas denied urban services.
• Typical of water and wastewater.
Infrastructure Phasing
• Plans for location and timing of future
urban service extensions.
• Plan is basis for capital improvement
investments.
• Example: Sioux Falls, SD, 2015 Growth
Management Plan.
Municipal Boundary
• Key facilities and services provided only by
municipality.
• Access to key facilities and services
attained only through annexation.
• Example is Lincoln, Nebraska.
Level of Service Standards
• Performance standards for urban services
vary spatially between “urban” and “rural”
land uses.
• Example: Palm Beach County, Florida,
where rural areas are not allowed to have
public/community water and sewer.
Spatial Capital Investment
• Focuses new infrastructure investments in
existing or planned urban areas.
• Example: Maryland’s “priority” investment
areas.
• Example: Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission.
Special Service Districts
• Sole provider of key public facilities and
services.
• Adopts policy of limiting infrastructure
extensions to areas targeted for urban
development.
• De factor urban service limits.
• Example: Baltimore County, Maryland.
State Priority Funding Areas
• State infrastructure investments targeted to
urban and urbanizing areas based on state
criteria.
• Local governments may invest in other
areas but at their own expense.
• Maryland statewide for roads, water, sewer
and schools.
• Colorado in metropolitan areas for
transportation.
Urban Growth Phasing
• Tiered Growth Strategy
• Urban Reserve District
• Public Land Management
Tiered Growth Strategy
• “Rings” of development intensity and
infrastructure provision.
• Pricing strategies often used.
• Example: Tucson’s “central core”, “midcity”, “evolving city” and “future city” tiers
each with different planning and design
standards.
Urban Reserve District
• Special areas reserved for future urban-scale
development at the urban fringe.
• Usually reserved through large lot zoning,
nonurban infrastructure, and “shadow”
platting.
• At appropriate time, urban infrastructure
installed and urban scale development allowed.
• Example: San Luis Obispo.
Public Land Management
• Preserve publicly-owned land from
development.
• Potentially “trading” some publicly-owned
land where development should occur with
owners of rural land where development
should not.
• Example: Pima County, Arizona.
Rural Growth Management
• Agriculture/Open Space District
• Urban Fringe Resource Management
• Rural Growth Monitoring
Agriculture/Open Space District
• Exclusive farm, forest, and other open space
uses allowed.
• Very large minimum lot sizes.
• No or few “urban” residences allowed.
• Example: Wicomico County, Maryland.
Urban Fringe Resource
Management
• Overlay district in rural areas where new
development reviewed under stringent
standards to protect habitat, sensitive
landscapes, etc.
• Resource management plans required.
• Example: Chico, California.
Rural Growth Monitoring
• Projected demand for legitimate
development of rural lands undertaken.
• Selected rural lands allocated for low
density urban development not using key
urban facilities and services.
• Example: King County, Washington.
Rural/Open Space Preservation
• Transfer of Development Rights
• Purchase of Development Rights
• Urban Fringe Land Acquisition
• Urban/Rural Buffer
• Community Separator
Transfer of Development Rights
• Development rights are assigned to rural
“sending” areas but cannot be exercised
unless purchased by developer and
transferred to urban “receiving” areas.
• Example: Pinelands, New Jersey.
Purchase of Development Rights
• Development rights assigned through a
planning process based on reasonable
factors are purchased by local government
through a voluntary purchase program.
• Can also include privately donated
conservation easements.
• Example: King County, Washington.
Urban Fringe Land Acquisition
• Urban fringe land identified and targeted for
acquisition in conscientious effort to contain
urban development.
• Special state and regional funds typically
used, but sometimes done by local
government.
• Examples: Boulder, Colorado; Maryland.
Urban/Rural Buffer
• Small scale greenbelt edge around city.
• Land acquired through combination of
acquisition and donation with conservation
easement.
• Privately owned land not provided with key
urban services and limited to open space
uses.
• Example: Davis, California.
Community Separator
• Narrow band of open space separating one
community from another.
• Land uses restricted to nonurban activities;
no urban services allowed. Essentially large
lot residential zoning but with some land
acquisition.
• Example: Sonoma County, California.
Intergovernmental Agreements
• Joint Planning Areas
• Spheres of Influence
• Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Joint Planning Areas
• Municipalities agree on land use
development affecting unincorporated areas.
• Agreements implemented through interlocal agreement enforceable by any party.
Spheres of Influence
• State designates future annexations areas of
municipalities and creates independent board
to assure that development in affected
unincorporated areas are consistent with
overall development plans of the relevant
municipalities.
• Example: California, Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo).
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
• Legislature authorizes municipalities to
review and approve subdivisions,
rezoning requests, and other land use
actions in unincorporated areas within 15 miles typically.
• Example: Eau Claire, Wisconsin.
American-Style
Urban Containment
Is Creative & Flexible
But what Really Works?