growth management or social engineering? the albuquerque experiment
DESCRIPTION
Growth Management or Social Engineering? The Albuquerque Experiment. Arthur C. Nelson, Ph.D., FAICP Professor & Director Urban Affairs & Planning Virginia Tech – Alexandria Center National Impact Fee Roundtable – Denver 2005. What is “Social Engineering”. The use of policy to - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Growth Management or Growth Management or Social Engineering?Social Engineering?
The Albuquerque The Albuquerque ExperimentExperiment
Growth Management or Growth Management or Social Engineering?Social Engineering?
The Albuquerque The Albuquerque ExperimentExperiment
Arthur C. Nelson, Ph.D., FAICPArthur C. Nelson, Ph.D., FAICPProfessor & DirectorProfessor & Director
Urban Affairs & PlanningUrban Affairs & PlanningVirginia Tech – Alexandria CenterVirginia Tech – Alexandria Center
National Impact Fee Roundtable – Denver National Impact Fee Roundtable – Denver 20052005
What is “Social Engineering”• The use of policy to
– Change behavior– Change social outcomes
• “Engineering” tools – Taxes and fees (economists’ preference)– Regulations (politicians’)– Combined (planners’ preference)
We are Already Socially Engineered Federal & State• Public education, standards• Public health (inoculations)• Public safety (driving rules, building
codes)• Retirement planning (IRAs)• Home Ownership (tax deductions)• Investment (capital gains preferences)
We Are Already Socially Engineered Local• Euclidian zoning (segregating land uses)• Exclusionary zoning (keep low-income
out)– Large-lot & large-house zoning
• Inefficient pricing– Average cost utilities, subsidized roads, etc.
= Urban Sprawl (development patterns that create more costs than benefits)
Effects of Social Engineeringin Land-Use Planning• Over-consumption of land• Rising costs per unit of new development• Inefficient land-use interactions causing
more traffic• Social segregation, skewed benefits• Higher quality of life in some areas, lower
QoL in others Less than optimal aggregate QoL
Purposes of Growth Management• Protect public goods• Minimize taxpayer exposure• Maximize positive land-use interactions
and minimize negative ones• Distribute growth benefits & burdens
equitably• Elevate the current quality of life
Planning and “Re-Engineering”• Provide public goods (buy/regulate)• Reconfigure land-use planning to reduce
facility costs (regulation), reduce taxpayer exposure (efficient pricing)
• Reconfigure land-use to maximize positive land-use interactions (regulation)
• Workforce housing; provision of facilities equitably (subsidies, regulation)
• Outcome should be aggregate QoL improvement
The Albuquerque Experiment• Planned Growth Strategies (PGS)• Based on Growth Management Goals• Encourage development in areas with
existing services “Fully-Served” tier = $0 marginal cost
• “Partially-Served” tier Charge “full” marginal cost
• “Unserved” tier Development agreements
The Role of Impact Fees• New Mexico Allows
Public SafetyWater, wastewater, stormwaterParks and recreation, open space,
trailsRoads
• New Mexico Does Not AllowSchools, libraries, community
centers
• PGS-based Impact Fees ForAll eligible fees except water &
wastewater
PGS-Impact Fee Team• Chris Nelson, Virginia Tech, team leader• Steve Tindale, Tindale Oliver Associates
Roads• James C. Nicholas, University of Florida
Public Safety, Parks, O.S., Trails• Kees Korsmit, Integrated Utilities Group
Stormwater drainage• Julian C. Juergensmeyer, Georgia State U.
Law
PGS-Based Impact Fees• Public Safety “east” & “west” service
areas: $207 to $276 per 1k sf du• Trails & Open Space: $390 per 1k sf du• Parks and Recreation 7 service areas:
$0 to $1,630 per 1k sf du• Drainage 5 services areas: $0 to $0.32
per impervious square foot• Roads 7 service areas: $0 to $2,918
per home in largest-home tierSteve Tindale to Review
Even More “Engineering”
• $0 for Affordable Housing (HUD)• $0 in Metropolitan Redevelopment Areas• 30% to 70% reduction for job-based
development west of Rio Grande (jobs-housing balance)
• New study to derive across-the-board reductions based on land-use integration