Author
Abstract
Local land use controls seek to limit the impact of one neighbor on another sometimes protecting natural resource environmental values. Federal and State programs to protect environmental values cannot do everything. They leave a residual risk of environmental loss that local people may want to address. Land use controls are traditionally zoning, subdivision control, and site plan review. These and other local controls have advantages in reducing risk, particularly when they are a part of an integrated approach that makes full use of the advantages at each level of government. Aspects of partnership approaches are discussed. In 1989, 449 members of the New York Planning Federation were asked to indicate if they used land use controls to reduce environmental risks, particularly risks to water quality. Freshwater wet lands, flood plains, and watershed rules and regulations are used in addition to traditional land use controls. Modifications to land use controls were made by almost half of the jurisdictions to protect natural resource environmental values, 26% to protect water quality. A fifth recognized they have water quality problems but as yet had not adapted their land use controls to this need. One third of the responses indicated they were involved in intergovernmental cooperation in the management of their controls -half the time with the county. The State should debate how and whether it chooses to stimulate changes which would encourage the use of the untapped potential for local land use controls to protect environmental quality.
Suggested Citation
Allee, David J., 1991.
"Environmental Protection Through Local Land Use Controls,"
Staff Papers
121377, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:cudasp:121377
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.121377
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cudasp:121377. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacorus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.