A Political Ecology of Exurbia in the Sunbelt: Lessons from an Award-Winning, “Unworkable” Plan
Material type: ArticlePublication details: Sage 2019Description: Vol 55, Issue 4, 2019 : (1175-1217 p.)Subject(s): Online resources: In: Urban affairs reviewSummary: Sarasota County, Florida’s award-winning Sarasota 2050 plan established the county as a leader in smart growth. The plan promotes a system of clustered development and open space as an alternative to sprawl beyond Sarasota’s growth boundary. Although adopted in 2002, by 2011, no projects had broken ground under the plan, which critics deemed “unworkable.” This article presents a case study of exurban political ecology in Sarasota to provide insight into the derailment of a promising strategy for managing exurban growth. Sarasota 2050’s policies were undermined by extra-local factors, including the recession and reduced state oversight of planning, and by incompatible policy agendas pursued by local interest groups. Also problematic was the plan’s cluster approach—a spatial strategy that rationalizes large landowner, planning, and conservation interests, but does little to address rural restructuring. The case points to the need for new planning strategies that mediate competing interests in exurbia.Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-Journal | Library, SPAB | E-Journals | Vol. 55(1-6) Jan-Dec, 2019. | Available |
Sarasota County, Florida’s award-winning Sarasota 2050 plan established the county as a leader in smart growth. The plan promotes a system of clustered development and open space as an alternative to sprawl beyond Sarasota’s growth boundary. Although adopted in 2002, by 2011, no projects had broken ground under the plan, which critics deemed “unworkable.” This article presents a case study of exurban political ecology in Sarasota to provide insight into the derailment of a promising strategy for managing exurban growth. Sarasota 2050’s policies were undermined by extra-local factors, including the recession and reduced state oversight of planning, and by incompatible policy agendas pursued by local interest groups. Also problematic was the plan’s cluster approach—a spatial strategy that rationalizes large landowner, planning, and conservation interests, but does little to address rural restructuring. The case points to the need for new planning strategies that mediate competing interests in exurbia.
There are no comments on this title.