The issue of growth management in urban settings has captured the attention of concerned groups for the past several decades. The voice that is sometimes lacking is that of the residents of neighborhoods who are inevitably affected by the economic and political decisions made by others on how and where growth should occur, but whose recommendations are often ignored or overturned. In an attempt to determine resident satisfaction with the growth management policies promulgated by urban decision makers, the researcher examined association newsletters from 44 neighborhoods in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Results of this study indicated that community satisfaction with growth management does not show a consistent pattern. What did emerge, however, was the fact that neighborhood residents want more information about growth management strategies and more involvement in the land use decision making process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baldassare, M. (1981). The growth dilemma: Residents’ views and local population change in the United States. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2.
City of Albuquerque .(1999). 1999 citizens’perceptions of community conditions—Executive summary. Albuquerque, NM: Research & Polling.
3.
City of Albuquerque, Thirteenth Council. (1998). Council Bill F/S R-70.
4.
Cox, W. (1999, March 18). The president’s new sprawl initiative: A program in search of a problem[Online]. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Available: http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1263es.html
5.
Danziger, J. A. (1983). Group influence in American county politics. Local Government Studies, 9(3), 67-82.
6.
Easterbrook, G. (1999, March 15). Suburban myth. The New Republic, 18-21.
7.
Fulton, W. (1996). The new urbanism challenges conventional planning. Land Lines, 8(5) [Online]. Available: http://www.lincolninst.edu/landline/1996/septembr/newurb2.html
8.
Guest, A. M. ,& Oropesa, R. S. (1986). Informal social ties and political activity in the metropolis. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 21, 550-574.
9.
Hosti, O. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10.
Jeffres, L. W. & Dobos, J. (1984). Communication and neighborhood mobilization. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 20, 97-112.
11.
Katz, B. , & Bradley, J. (1999, December). Divided we sprawl. The Atlantic Online[Online]. Available: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99dec/9912katz.htm
12.
Katz, P. (1994). The New Urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill.
13.
King, C. S. ,& Stivers, C. (1998). Government is us: Public administration in an anti-government era. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Lacayo, R. (1999). The brawl over sprawl. Time, 153(11) [Online]. Available: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/articles/0,3266,21490,00.html
15.
Lelle, M. A. ,& Webb, A. (2000, May). Communications as a change strategy to influence land use decisions: Results ofa public opinion survey in Michigan. Paper presented at the Urban Affairs Association 30th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles.
16.
Mesch, G. S. , & Schwirian, K. P. (1996). The effectiveness of neighborhood collective action. Social Problems, 43(4), 467-483.
17.
Moe, R. (1996). Growing smarter: Fighting sprawl and restoring community in America[Online]. Available: http://www.smartgrowth.org/library/Richard_Moe.html
18.
Nash, G. D. (1999). The federal landscape: An economic history of the twentieth century west. Tucson: The Universityof Arizona Press.
19.
Oropesa, R. S. (1995). The ironies of human resource mobilization by neighborhood associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 24, 235-252.
20.
Rich, R. C. (1980). A political-economy approach to the study of neighborhood organizations. American Journal of Political Science, 24(4), 559-592.
21.
Rusk, D. (2000). Inside game, outside game: Winning strategies for saving urban America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
22.
Shared Vision, Inc. (1998). Recommended five-year goals for the city of Albuquerque(Report to the Mayor and the City Council on the Albuquerque Goals Forum). Albuquerque, NM: Author.
23.
Sharp, E. (1981). Organizations, their environments, and goal definition: An approach to the study of neighborhoodassociation in urban politics. Urban Life, 9(4), 415-439.
Smith, D. H. (1997). Grassroots associations are important: Some theory and a reviewof the impact literature. Nonprofitand Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26, 269-306.
26.
Smith, D. H. (2000). Grassroots associations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Staley, S. R. (1999, February). The sprawling of America: In defense of the dynamic city(Policy Study No. 251) [Online]. Los Angeles: Reason Public Policy Institute. Available: http://www.rppi.org/ps251.html
28.
Staley, S. R. (2000, November 1). Poor communities, small builders will bare burden of ballot-box zoning[Online]. Los Angeles: Reason Public Policy Institute. Available: http://www.rppi.org/110100.html
29.
Taub, R. P. , Surgeon, G. P., Lindholm, S., Otti, P. B.,& Bridges, A. (1977). Urban voluntary associations, locality basedand externally induced. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 425-442.
30.
Webb, E. J. , Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1970). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research inthe social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.
