"What makes a good city"

7/31/2019 "What makes a good city"

1/22

What makes a Good City?Sustainability and Reinvestment for Kansas Citys Future

Jamie Ferris

Public Administration 5535

Dr. Carr

7 December, 2011


2/22

1

What makes a good city may vary based on your income level, your age or stage in life,

your marital or family status, you ethnicity or religion or your political views. The elements a

city is composed of varies as well: population size and demographics, tax levels, services

provided by the city, proximity to desired amenities, the list is extensive and diverse as well as

highly subjective. Some theorists such as Charles Tiebout (1956) suggests that smaller, more

fragmented governments give the public the opportunity to chose which city to live in based on

the tax-service package in each respective area that best suits their needs.

The Kansas City metropolitan area exemplifies urban sprawl and embodies all of the

negative effects the sprawl has on the city and its communities. Sprawled areas, defined by

rigidly separated homes, shops, and workplaces; a network of roads marked by huge blocks and

poor access[which] lack of well-defined, thriving activity centers, such as downtowns and

town centers, affects citizens basic quality of life, people living in more sprawling regions

tend to drive greater distances, own more cars, breathe more polluted air, face a greater risk of

traffic fatalities and walk and use transit less (Ewing, Pendall & Chen, 2003, pp. 5).

These impacts are visible throughout the Kansas City metro, punctuated by the

overwhelming reliance on private, car-centered, transportation and relatively low population

density in the urban core. The population has consistently pushed outward since the end of

World War II, in Kansas City MissouriJC Nichols Company was finishing a home a day for

years following the Second World War (t2 Entertainment, & Inland Sea Productions). This

development into the seemingly infinite greenfields in then-rural areas surrounding Kansas

Cityon all sideshas continued for the past 60+ years, creating extensive sprawl and

fragmentation of a suffering population.


3/22

2

Census data shows that the most expensive homes in Kansas City form a ring around the

city; this golden ring has been moving farther from downtown at a rate of about two miles per

decade. In its wake are acres of declining property values that have left many residents stranded

(Anderson, 1998, pp. 12-13).

Between 1990 and 1996, the Kansas City metropolitan area spread 70%, while its

population, now over two million, increased only 5% (Lacayo, 1999). This disproportionate

growth is unsustainable in regard to both resources and economics. Additionally, with changing

demographics, the way in which Kansas City expands may not meet the needs of the population;

were overbuilt today in the number of large lot homes that will be needed in 2040. The demand

will shiftto homes in suburban and urban settings that have walkable featureswere going to

see a tremendous change in demand and Im not sure were prepared for that change (t2

Entertainment, & Inland Sea Productions).

Dr. Robert Freilich, formerly of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, suggests in his

1997 report To Sprawl or Not to Sprawl: a National Perspective for Kansas City, sprawl has

engendered six major crises for Americas major metropolitan regions. These crises are: central

city and first- and second-ring suburban distress; environmental degradation through loss of

wetlands, sensitive lands, air and water quality degradation; massive gasoline energy

overutilization; fiscal insolvency, transportation congestion, infrastructure deficiencies and

taxpayer revolts; massive agricultural land conversion; and housing inaffordability [sic] (pp. 2).

Decidedly anti-sprawl and suburbanization, Robert Putnam (2000), author of Bowling

Alone, explains how the process of suburbanization creates, over time, homogeneous,

lifestyle enclaves, segregated by race, class, education, [and] life stage (pp. 209).

Additionally, due to the physical structure of suburbs, and, the way in which our lives are now


4/22

3

centered inside the house, rather than on the neighborhood or the community, with the large use

of automobiles, the life of the sidewalk and the front yard has largely disappeared, and the social

intercourse that used to be the main characteristic of urban life has vanished (Jackson, as

cited in in Putnam, 2000, pp. 211).

Recently, in response to the increasingly evident negative externalities of sprawl, more

environmentally sustainable urban development has become a possible alternative solution to

various problems facing our society. Not only is the development of walkable, livable

communities in urban, suburban and rural areas (though the focus is often primarily on urban

centers) a way to reinvest in our social communities by encouraging a more cooperative,

engaged, interactive form of development but to mitigate the negative ecological effects of

sprawl as well.

As Edith Callaghan and John Colton asserted in their 2006 study, communities that are

rich in community and social capital are more resilient and tend to sustain economic growth

more successfully (Callaghan and Colton, 2008, pp.931-942). The researchers go on to explain

their intersection of environment and community; the movement toward sustainable

development lies neither in focusing solely on the bottom line immediate needs, nor on the

abstract sustainable future, but in a middle ground that seeks to enhance long and short term

community resilience through investments in all the various forms of community capital

(Callaghan and Colton, 2008, pp. 932).

In fact, the design of a triple-bottom-line approach to sustainable development has been

initiated and defined as: a process of reconciliation of (1) the ecological imperative to live

within global biodiversity carrying capacity and maintain biodiversity; (2) the social imperative

to ensure the development of democratic systems of governance to effectively propagate and


5/22

4

sustain values that people wish to live by; and (3) the economic imperative to ensure that basic

needs are met (Dale and Onyx, 2010, pp. 2).

This idea is, fundamentally, the basic tenet of Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver IIs

federally funded Green Impact Zone of Missouri program located in the urban core of Kansas

City. As Van Jones, founder of Green for All and President Obamas Special Counsel for Green

Jobs stated, the project takes 150 blocks [of] blighted, tough neighborhoods, weatherizes every

home there that needs it, fixes mass transit and puts people to worksaves people money as well

as helping planet Earth (Green Impact Zone of Missouri [GISZMO], 2009).

This program, which attempts to focus on infill development in the urban core, is

currently being implemented, and serving as a pilot city for programs of this nature across the

country, is located in a particular area of Kansas City [see Figure 1, Figure 2] where

unemployment is, between 20 to 50 percent, and the poverty rate is approximately 31 percent.

Notably, the percentage of residents that is black is 89.29 percent, compared 31 percent in all of

Kansas City (GIZMO, 2009). This is consistent with what Morgan and Mareschal (1999) found,

that cities that are highly fragmented, particularly with populations over 10 thousand, have

greater instances of black isolation. As they proposed, it can be asserted in Kansas City that

fragmentation has increased the racial divisions within the urban area and facilitates the ability of

whites to minimize contact with black residents (Morgan & Mareschal, 1999).

Focusing on community involvement, job creation and training as well as implementation

of green, energy efficient practices, Congressman Cleaver explained, the Green Impact Zone is

bringing together an unprecedented coalition of stakeholders, including local government,

community agencies, neighborhood organizations, universities, private utilities and small

contractors to dramatically and transparently achieve the objectives of the American Recovery


6/22

5

and Reinvestment ActLet us seize this giant opportunity to create a better future and show

America, when it comes to green we are in the lead (GIZMO, 2010).

The city of Kansas City authorized $1.5 million to help launch the Green Impact Zone

initiative in September 2009. The Mid-America Regional Council administers the grant and

provides oversight for the initiativealong with its Green Impact Zone partners[MARC

brought] millions of dollars in stimulus funds and other investments to the zone (GIZMO,

2010). Projects incorporated in the initiative include: housing assistance, employment and job

training, public safety and community service, weatherization and energy and water

conservation, infrastructure [including transportation] and communityparticularly youth

involvement (GIZMO, 2010).

This engagement of the community could prove vital to the viability of the sustainability

efforts. As Kent Portney of Tufts University suggests that by being more citizen-oriented, cities

can help create longevity in their population by incorporating training, education and other

assistance, creating a population that is self-sufficient and that keeps its money within the

community (Portney, 2003, pp. 105). This fostering of the well being of the population not only

aids the economic strength of the city but also can help develop civic trusta key element of

social capital that can help develop a strong community. Additionally, the research by Savitch, et

al. (1993), though somewhat contested, suggests that a strong urban core does more than provide

benefits for urban residents; it creates healthier suburbs as well.

A part of the federal economic stimulus package, the American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act allowed the U.S. Department of Transportations Transportation Investments

Generating Economic Recovery [TIGER] program to allocate a total of $50 million: $26.2

million to fund transportation infrastructure improvements in the Green Impact Zone, as well as


7/22

6

$23.8 million for improvements to regional transit corridors that extend from the urban core

into suburbs on both sides of the state line (GIZMO, 2010).

Additionally, In November 2009, [Kansas City Power and Light] received a $24 million

grant from the Department of Energy to help fund a SmartGrid demonstration project in the

Green Impact Zone and surrounding areas [see Figure 3]The SmartGrid project will introduce

innovative technologies to the urban core of Kansas City, which will allow customers to more

effectively manage their energy usage and costs and allow KCP&L to improve infrastructure and

reliability (GIZMO, 2010). This technology, which allows residents to monitor and manage

their energy consumption, is a progressive step in beginning the process of updating the countys

outdated and overburdened current power grid structure, allowing for more cultivation and

utilization of alternative energy sources.

One vital aspect of the communityhousingfaces serious trouble; approximately 25

percent of the properties in the zone are vacant lots, and another one-sixth have vacant structures.

Fewer than half the homes are owner-occupied. Almost 20 percent of all mortgages were

delinquent over the last two years (GIZMO, 2010). The program is spearheading efforts to

assist in capital building and increase value in the neighborhoods within the zone including low-

income weatherization projects, rehabilitation of foreclosed homes, development of vacant lots,

removal of dangerous buildings, and addressing rental property maintenance and absentee

ownership (GIZMO, 2010). Additionally, the zone has partnered with Bryant Real Estate of

Kansas City to help educate, counsel and provide assistance on achieving homeownership to

citizens within the zone (GIZMO, 2010). Encouraging homeownership could help build as sense

of pride for the residents, promoting long term residence in the area that could, in turn, help

create a stronger commitment to development.


8/22

7

Molly OMera of the WorldWatch Institute (1999) emphasizes the significance of livable

communities; in her article, Reinventing Cities for People and the Planet she affirms the

detriment to American social institutions caused by sprawl and impersonal communities. She

writes, the arrangement of buildings and ease of access to them help determine the livability of

a city. Streets come alive with pedestrians when shops, factories, offices and houses are all

within walking distance of each otherIn contrastcrime often plagues fragmented cities,

which isolate the poor in distinct pockets (pp. 43).

Putnam agrees with the connection between civic interaction and safer, more cohesive

communities; he cites research by Jane Jacobs (The Death and Life of Great American Cities,

1961) that concludes, social capitalis what most differentiated safe and organized cities from

unsafe and disorganized ones where as, controlling for poverty and other factors, a weak

organizational base and low social participation in local activities face an increased risk of crime

and violence (Putnam, 2000, pp. 307-308). The Green Impact Zone, which has a markedly

higher crime rate than the rest of the Kansas City metro, is engaging the citizens in a

participatory role in the revitalization of the neighborhoods with aims to instill more pride in the

community and deter future crime.

In addition to a strong sense of social community, it is clear that development that is to be

sustainable and its effects lasting must encourage social community development as well.

Though civic engagement has been in severe decline over the last two decades, rates of

participation increase with urban revitalization movements, improving citizen involvement in the

community (Putnam, 2000). Likewise, as Thad Williamson (2002) of the Jepson School of

Leadership Studies, University of Richmond suggested, a place that looks and feels like a

coherent community should help produce citizens who are better able to identify with where they


9/22

8

live and are more engaged in civic and political life (pp. 235).

This argument is counter to some of the most basic principles of Tiebouts (1956) public

choice theory. The Kansas City region is highly fragmented; though spatially it is quite large,

many interests vary on either side of the state line as well as among factions within the city itself.

Tiebouts (1956) theory suggests that smaller, more fragmented governments, and therefore

communities, give the public the opportunity to chose which city to live in based on the tax-

service package in each respective area that best suits their needs. This model, however, rather

than effectively having cities compete for the best interests of Kansas City, discourages

community engagement on a large scale and marginalizes the residents of the urban core.

As Canada Research Chair in Sustainable Community Development Ann Dale wrote,

[community participation and involvement] is the key intersection between social capital and

sustainable development. Social capital is about relationshipsrelationships within

communities, and between communitiesWe need to re-examine out relationships with the

natural worldWe will not realize sustainable development unless we understand the personal

imperative (Dale, 2002, pp. 17).

Many who advocate the revitalization and increased economic and ecological

sustainability of the Kansas City metro area have found ways of attracting like-minded people

looking to create social and professional situations in which to contribute to the development of

the city. Organizations such as The Crossroads Community Association, the Rivermarket

Community Association, the Urban Core Group, and others, have become popular in advocating,

publicizing and achieving projects for the betterment of the greater community.

The problem with much of this regeneration of urban development is the inequities

present in how the city utilizes incentives and, therefore, where development takes place. The


10/22

9

prevalence of TIF-based incentives for business and economic development has been great

throughout the KCMO metro area due to the availability of program implementation and the

allowance of discretion in approving TIF projects. The use of both TIF and EAT practices

increased over 200 percent between 2000 and 2004 (Kelsay, 2007). Based on maps (see Figure

4) of TIF district demographics, [2007], 88 percent of TIF projects have occurred in KCMO

Council Districts one, two, four and six. These districts are the most highly populated, and

maintain the highest level of educated, affluent, non-minority residents. In contrast, KCMO

Council Districts, three and five which are the lowest income, highest minority districts, hold

only 12 percent of TIF projects. This unequal TIF project distribution is counter-intuitive

considering the existence of [physical] blight as common criteria for project approval, though, as

Long noted, the Missouri TIF statue does not use socio-economic distress factors to determine

physical blight (R. Long, personal communication, May 2, 2010).

As can be seen by the distribution of incentive-based projects in the urban core, the more

distressed areas are not truly given priority in redevelopment and renewal efforts. In order to

successfully grow the population and economy of the urban KCMO area, particularly when

attempting to reverse the damage done by the recent recession, the most severely distressed areas

must be stabilized and made to prosper; if incentive use will increase once again in order to do

this, it must be done equitably. As Blakely and Leigh (2010) write, increased business

investment can transform many inner cities from places left behind by the new economy into

places leading the way to economic success (pp. 266). Investment in the urban core is vital,

otherwise the continued inequalities will only cause further detriment to the sustainability of the

city as a whole.

Seeking the perspective of the various stakeholders and trying to understand what their


11/22

10

priorities are is vital to the success of downtown projects because, to get the masses to move on

this [development] issue requires that concepts of sustainability be brought to them in a way that

makes sustainable living relevant to them, their families, and their communities (Callaghan and

Colton, 2008, pp. 933). The perspective that a resilient community is one that finds the

appropriate balance of capital within a particular community context, and encompasses public,

private, and individual interests is key in understanding the components associated with the

overhaul of the developmental status quo (Callaghan and Colton, 2008, pp. 939).

Not coincidentally, Kansas City is the location of not only the Green Impact Zone project

but another pilot program in sustainability as well. In an effort to curb the negative impact sprawl

has on the environment all throughout the metro, Kansas City has partnered with the

Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] the Sustainable Skylines projects which works with

various urban areas across the country help innovate, fund and implement sustainable practices

throughout the municipal area. Sustainable Skylines provides a flexible framework for

stakeholders to choose projects to implement over the next three years [beginning in 2007].

Those projects will: integrate transportation, energy, land use and air quality planning, yield

measurable air quality benefits within three years, promote collaboration among multiple

stakeholders, identify and leverage resources among partners (Sustainable Skylines, 2010).

Gerald Williams of the Kansas City, Missouri City Planning and Development

Department explains the attraction of the area, the [City level] political climate right now is

very supportive of sustainability and there are numerous examples of sustainable initiates going

on in KCMO (Williams, 2010). He goes on to explain that the city is committing itself to

sustainability efforts on a governmental level, including partnering to achieve the goals of the

Sustainable Skylines program.


12/22

11

Seven main projects for the initiative have been decided upon by a community group of

stakeholders. The projects, focusing on environmental matters include: the Constructing Clean

Air project which aims to minimize the air pollution that comes from construction projects, KC

Idle-Free, a metro-wide partnership of organizations helping improve air quality by reducing

automobile idling that takes place on their property, Parking Lots to Parks which reimagines the

traditional parking lot, designing them to have a lesser environmental impact, Solar KC, a project

to install solar technology at public buildings and Water Wise, a demonstration project to show

the relationship between air and water quality. The project includes Water Wise for home

interiors, which will demonstrate the water conservation strategies and practices adopted in the

renovation of the Project Living Proofmodel home (GIZMO, 2010).

The goal of Project Living Proof is to restore a modest home at 917 Emanuel Cleaver

Blvd in Kansas City, Missouri, to exhibit how to make a century-old home more energy

efficientThe home will be a demonstration of theKCP&L Smart Grid which is a combination

of onsite energy generation, advanced switches and capacitors, automated meter reading, and

other smart technologies that allow for real-time monitoring and management of energy usage

(Project Living Proof, 2010). Such projects allow the greater public to visualize the possibilities

for implementing sustainable efforts in their own neighborhoods.

In addition to supporting federally funded programs, the city of Kansas City adopted the

Greater Downtown Area Plan in March 2010 outlining goals for the economic, social and

environmental development of the city. The five outlined goals include: doubling the population

downtown, increasing employment, Creating a walkable downtown, retaining and promoting

safe, authentic neighborhoods, and promoting sustainability (Greater Downtown, 2010).
http://www.kcenergy.org/waterwise/projectlivingproof.htmlhttp://www.kcpl.com/about/policycenter/SmartGridFactSheet.pdfhttp://www.kcpl.com/about/policycenter/SmartGridFactSheet.pdfhttp://www.kcpl.com/about/policycenter/SmartGridFactSheet.pdfhttp://www.kcenergy.org/waterwise/projectlivingproof.html


13/22

12

It is rather undisputed that the manner in which cities are developed and organized needs

to be reconsidered and revised. Putnam (2000) promotes spending less time traveling and more

time connecting with neighbors[living] in more integrated and pedestrian-friendly

areas[through methods such as] mixed-use zoning, pedestrian-friendly street grids and more

space for public use [which] should enhance social capital (pp. 408). How development affects

the residents and their quality of life as well as the relationship between the physical

environment and the people who populate it, including a wide range of social issues that

transcend the purely environmental is an essential element to consider when looking to create

an area with vitality, longevity that enhances the greater community (Portney, 2003, pp. 125).

The notion of walkability is truly central to the revitalization of the urban core. Williams

explains that aspect of the citys plan:

the recently approved Greater Downtown Area Plan identifies walkabilityas the most important mode of transportation downtown and has a variety ofrecommendations for how to make downtown more walkableFuturedevelopment downtown is envisioned to be dense, walkable and sustainablethenew development code now requires pedestrian impact studies and alsoincludes new zoning tools which encourage walkable development (e.g.Pedestrian Overlay Zoning, new downtown zoning districts)The obviousbenefit is to reduce vehicle miles traveled and bolster alternative modes (eachtransit rider begins and ends their trip as a pedestrian). But from an economicstandpoint, "walkable" communities tend to also be more desirable places to live(there are other qualities that create enduring communities, but it seems to me thatwalkability is a key element). At the basic human level, walkability improvesmobility and allows better access to jobs, services, food etc... (Williams, 2010).

The comprehensive plan provides an outline for the implementation of walkable access

between districts in the city. Linking the different areas from the Rivermarket to the Crossroads

to the Plaza would enable people to experience much more of the city without relying on a car

and encouraging engagement in the community.


14/22


15/22

14

jobs in other parts of the metropolitan area. Representatives from MARCs RideShare program,

KCATA and The JO shared information with 59 residents, many of whom also participated in a

bus tour. Participants got first-hand experience in commuting by bus, learning where to catch the

bus and make transfers while they experienced the ride (GIZMO, 2011).

The Green Impact Zone initiative has not proceeded without problems and criticism,

however. According to a report by the Kansas City Star, of the more than $85 pledged by state

and federal governments million for five major improvement projects in and around the zone,

just $25 million had actually been spent or bid by the end of September 2011 (Helling, 2011).

Additionally, the major projects are deemed responsible for fewer than 150 jobs, according to

figures provided to the government. Cleaver had expected 1,000 by now (Helling, 2011).

Adding to the problems, there have been construction, regulatory, administrative, and labor

issues to contend with that have delayed much of the work (Helling, 2011). Many residents have

expressed disappointment in the slow progress, particularly in the area of job creation. In an area

of the city with soaring levels of unemployment, promises of over 1,000 jobs created are not

taken lightly. Congressman Cleaver agrees, [he] called the zones job creation record most

disappointing. At this point, I thought we would have a thousand or more jobs, he said. I am

frustrated that the job creation has not surfaced as fast as we wanted (Helling, 2011).

Concerning accessibility of jobs, this issues disproportionately affects the urban poor; as

higher wage jobs move their location further and further outside the urban core, the ability of

workers to reach those jobs decreases. This problem of isolating the urban poor (the majority of

which are minorities) is, while not the direct topic of this study, a problem that could be

remedied with smart growth; the development of walkable neighborhoods, mixed-income


16/22

15

housing and mixed-used development as well as implementation of a more comprehensive transit

program in the downtown area.

To this point, Ferilich (1997) describes the benefits of new urbanist design principles;

First, [new urbanist design] creates sufficient density to encourage theuse of public transit but also relies upon the use of transportation corridors andcenters with or without rail transit. Second, it locates residences, jobs, and retaildestinations close to public transit facilities. Third, it utilizes mixed uses, withretail and employment locations within walking distance of residential areas.Fourth, it is built on a grid transportation network, which is not divided into thearterial-collector-local road classification system found in most suburban areas.Finally, it contains urban design guidelines and design features in order toencourage a more pedestrian orientation that, theoretically, encourages itsresidents to eschew the automobile in favor of more communal forms of

transportation (pp. 16).

It is upon these principles that the city built its Greater Downtown Area Plan. The plan

states of its vision: we must focus on connecting our neighborhoods to create a strong urban

community, flourishing with diversity, fostering business, maintaining historic neighborhood

identities, and sustaining a safe, vibrant, and healthy Greater Downtown Area for current and

future generations (Greater Downtown, pp. 5). Utilizing the triple bottom line approach and

focusing attention to areas of great need, such as the public education system, environmental

impact and combating sprawl, the plan may be the innovative display of commitment to the

future of the urban core needed to encourage othersprivate companies, investors and

individuals aliketo pursue downtown ventures.

Budding interest from non-urban residents has been augmented by the addition of the,

somewhat contentious, Power and Light entertainment district, the revitalization of the

Crossroads Arts District and the popularity of events such as the monthly First Fridays gallery

open house and the encouragement of entrepreneurship and small business development in the

area. Additionally, under favorable market conditions, conversion of downtown buildings into


17/22

16

lofts and condominiums helped promote an influx of downtown residents the likes of which had

not been seen in Kansas City in decades (t2 Entertainment, & Inland Sea Productions).

Sprawl breeds increased governmental fragmentation and inefficiencies, as more

independent levels of government, each with its own agenda, impact more people and

businesses. Solutions require broad-based support. History has taught that lasting fiscal growth

occurs within a strong economy one based as much on the quality of life and successful

business practices as on collaborative, rather than adversarial, government participation

planning for growth (Freilich, 1997, pp. 14).

Though based in deep-seeded socioeconomic issues and complicated by tax and

development codes and incentives, and exacerbated by an institutionally reinforced, unattainable

ideal of the American Dream and its focus on the present, the decentralization of Kansas City

into an ever-expanding sea of suburbs is a problem that can be curbed. With the implementation

of good, future-focused policies, an entrepreneurial spirit and a desire to create a city that is

sustainable economically and environmentally, the negative effects sprawl has had on the Kansas

City metro can be mitigated. By continuing to encourage and widely implement sound practices

like those utilized in the Green Impact Zone and actively, creatively and relentlessly pursuing the

goals outlined in the citys plan, Kansas City may be able to reach the status of a world class

city, a potentially worthy and feasible aspiration.


18/22

17

Figure

1: Green Impact Zone of Missouri District Map

Figure 2: GIZMO Demographics


19/22

18

Figure 3: GIZMO Smart Grid Plan


20/22

19

Figure 4: KCMO TIF Demographics, 2007


21/22

20

References

Anderson, G. (1998). Why smart growth: A primer. Smart Growth Network, International City/County ManagementAssociation. Web. 3 Oct 2010.

Blakely, E. J., and Nancey G.L. (2010). Planning Local Economic Development. 4th. Los Angeles: Sage.

Callaghan, E. and Colton, J. (2008). Building sustainable & resilient communities: a balancing of community capital.Environmental Development Sustainability 10, 931-942.

City Area Development Council. Tax and incentive profile. Retrieved fromhttp://www.smartkc.com/SiteLocation/TaxesIncentives/EnterpriseZones.php.

Collison, K. (2011, Nov 28). Can downtown bear the cost of proposed streetcar line? Kansas City Star. Retrievedfrom http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/28/3291363/can-downtown-bear-costs-of-proposed.html#storylink=misearch

Dale, A. and Newman, L. (2010). Social capital: A necessary and sufficient condition for sustainable community

development? Community Development Journal, 10(1), 1-21. cdj.oxfordjournals.org. Retrieved at MillerNichols Library.

Ewing, R., Chen,D. and Pendall, R. (2002). Measuring sprawl and its impact. Washington, D.C.: Smart GrowthAmerica.

Freilich , R.H. (19997). To sprawl or not to sprawl: a national perspective for kansas city. Informally publishedmanuscript, School of Law, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, Retrieved fromwww.umkc.edu/whmckc/publications/KIMBALL/.../Freilich-04-21-1997.pdf.

Kansas City, Missouri. (2010). Greater Downtown Area Plan.

Green Impact Zone of Missouri. (2009). Kansas City, Missouris community plan for the American recovery and

reinvestment act of 2009. Retrieved from http://greenimpactzone.org.

Helling, D. (2011, Dec 3). Green impact zone makes small impact so far in KC. Retrieved fromhttp://www.kansascity.com/2011/12/03/3300055/green-impact-zone-in-kc-makes.html#storylink=misearch

Jackson, K. T. (1985). Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 272-280.

Kansas City of Kansas City, Missouri, Economic Development Corporation, & Planned Industrial ExpansionAuthority. (2008, Apr 23). Economic Development and Incentive Policy Implementation Progress Update.

Kelsay, M. P. (2007, 17 Jan). Uneven patchwork: tax increment financing in Kansas City.Reclaim Democracy,Kansas City Chapter.

Lacayo, R. (1999, March 22). The Brawl over Sprawl. Time. Retrieved fromhttp://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990488-5,00.html

Morgan, D. and Mareschal, P. (1999). Central city/suburban inequality and metropolitan political fragmentation.Urban Affairs Review. 34 (4). 578-595.

O'Mera, M. (1999). "Reinventing Cities for People and the Planet." WorldWatch Paper. 147, 43-46.
http://www.smartkc.com/SiteLocation/TaxesIncentives/EnterpriseZones.phphttp://www.umkc.edu/whmckc/publications/KIMBALL/.../Freilich-04-21-1997.pdfhttp://greenimpactzone.org/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990488-5,00.htmlhttp://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990488-5,00.htmlhttp://greenimpactzone.org/http://www.umkc.edu/whmckc/publications/KIMBALL/.../Freilich-04-21-1997.pdfhttp://www.smartkc.com/SiteLocation/TaxesIncentives/EnterpriseZones.php


22/22

21

Portney, K. E. (2003). Taking Sustainable Cities Seriously. Cambridge: The MIT Press,101-175.

Preliminary Baseline Data Report. (2009). Green Impact Zone of Missouri. Kansas City. Retrieved fromwww.greenimpactzone.org/assets/preliminary-data-report.pdf

Project Living Proof. (2010). KC Energy. Metropolitan Energy Center, n.d. Retrieved fromhttp://www.kcenergy.org/projectlivingproof.aspx.

Putnam, R.D. (2000).Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Savitch, H.V., Collins, D., Sanders, D., and Markham, J.P. (1993). Ties that bind: Central cities, suburbs, and thenew metropolitan region.Economic Development, 7(4), 341-357.

Sustainable Skylines Kansas City. (2010). Mid-America Regional Council. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sustainableskylineskc.org.

t2 Entertainment, & Inland Sea Productions (Executive producer). (2009). The Next American Dream. USA:KCPT/PBS.

Tiebout, C. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. The Journal of Political Economy. 64 (5), 416-424.

Williams, G. E-mail Interview by Jamie Ferris. 12 Nov 2010. 16 Nov 2010.

Williamson, T. (2002). Sprawl, Politics, and Participation: A Preliminary Analysis. National Civic Review, 91(3),235. 2002. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. Miller Nichols Library.

Year One Annual Report. (2010). Green Impact Zone of Missouri Kansas City. Retrieved fromhttp://www.greenimpactzone.org/assets/annual-report-09-30-10.pdf

Year Two Annual Report. (2011). Green Impact Zone of Missouri Kansas City. Retrieved fromhttp://www.greenimpactzone.org/assets/2011annualreport.pdf.
http://www.greenimpactzone.org/assets/annual-report-09-30-10.pdfhttp://www.greenimpactzone.org/assets/annual-report-09-30-10.pdf

Documents

"What makes a good city"