|
WCEL
> Issues > Urban Growth and
Development > Smart Bylaws Guide > Part
1 > Urban Containment Boundaries
Smart Bylaws Guide – Urban Containment Boundaries
Urban containment boundaries (UCBs, also known as Urban Growth
Boundaries in the U.S.) are lines drawn on planning maps around
developed areas showing where urban land ends and rural land begins.
The purpose of UCBs is to provide suitable land for well-planned
urban growth while maintaining the integrity of working lands. UCBs
prevent low-density rural and exurban sprawl and encourage orderly
development. In practice, UCBs create certainty for developers by
directing where infrastructure investment will occur, and, coupled
with zoning and other policies, channel growth into existing
neighbourhoods and areas where density can be maximized.
UCBs assist local governments to meet a number of planning goals
such as:
- maximizing the use of existing infrastructure and minimizing
new infrastructure costs;
- revitalizing downtowns and town centres;
- maintaining a working land base (agricultural, rural,
forested, and other resource lands) and the green
infrastructure;
- creating vibrant mixed-use neighbourhoods;
- minimizing air pollution by encouraging a mix of services near
to residences and employment, thus decreasing the need for
automobile use;
- improving the viability of transit by concentrating
development; and
- protecting the environment.
While the term "urban containment boundary" may be
controversial, UCBs are in place in most communities that have a
mixture of urban and rural land. UCBs are good fiscal planning -
they assist local governments to ensure that existing infrastructure
is fully used before considering new greenfield development sites.
They also support existing rural and urban economies.
Myths and Facts about Urban Containment
"UCBs increase housing prices by limiting the amount of land
available for development"
Myth - UCBs ensure that land is used
efficiently and encourage the redevelopment of already-serviced yet
underutilized land. The alternative, large lot development patters,
actually increase housing costs over time (see A
Case for Smart Growth, p.26).
"UCBs create more traffic congestion and
over-densification."
Myth - by creating more compact centres,
residents have access to employment, shopping and recreation near
their homes. The need for single occupancy vehicles decreases, and
the viability and convenience of transit increases. Good design, a
variety of housing forms in each street, and adequate natural space
ensure a high quality of life in any neighbourhood.
"UCBs result in a greater diversity of housing and efficient
use of infrastructure"
Fact - Towns and cities with strong
urban containment policies also have the most effective housing
diversification and affordable housing strategies in place.
See the resources listed at the end of this page for more
information. |
Creating an Urban Containment Boundary
Creating a UCB involves the use of a combination of the following
tools:
Regional Growth Strategies and Official Community Plans -
designating the UCB and establishing policies for its implementation
and review;
Zoning - rezoning land to ensure that urban-type development
cannot occur outside of the UCB (for example, using large minimum
lot sizes), and that land inside the UCB is well-planned for future
growth. This includes prohibiting or limiting commercial development
outside of existing or planned commercial areas;
Infrastructure Limits and Timing of Servicing - amending capital
plans and timing extensions of servicing to reflect the priorities
of the UCB;
Agriculture Policies - ensuring UCBs reinforce agriculture
policies and the integrity of the Agricultural Land Reserve;
Permit Caps - assessing the need to limit further approved growth
until a certain amount of existing approved capacity has been
completed, or to limit the number of new approvals per year.
Urban Containment Boundaries
Urban Containment Boundary Strategies
For More Information
Holding
the Line: Urban Containment in the U.S. (Brookings Institute,
2002). This report reviews the research on urban containment
generally, and also examines the experience of such policies in
particular metropolitan areas.
The
Link Between Growth Management and Housing Affordability: The
Academic Evidence (Brookings Institute, 2002). Urban growth
boundaries have been criticized as increasing housing prices by
limiting developable land. This report reviews the academic
literature on the link between growth management and housing
affordability. The paper concludes that the market as reflected in
population growth is the primary determinant of housing prices.
Sound growth management policies provide more affordable housing
than traditional land use policies.
Myths and
Facts about Urban Growth Boundaries (1000 Friends of Oregon).
Urban
Growth Boundary (48th Report of the Parliament of South
Australia's Environment, Resources and Development Committee, May
2003)
|
