Journal of Planning Education and Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goetz, E. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 20, No. 1, 37-51 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/073945600128992582
© 2000 Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning

Fair Share or Status Quo?

The Twin Cities Livable Communities Act

Edward G. Goetz

Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota

This article presents an analysis of the potential impact of a program of regional fair share housing in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area: the Livable Communities Act (LCA). The author argues that fair share programs can be judged by two standards: (1) the degree to which they meet current and projected needs for affordable housing and (2) the extent to which they redistribute affordable housing opportunities throughout a region. The analysis shows that the LCA fails on the first of these standards and only minimally meets the second. Should program goals be fully met by all of the participating communities, the LCA will result in a decrease in the relative availability of affordable housing by 12 percent compared to a continuation of the status quo. In addition, overall, the program will not result in significant redistribution of affordable housing opportunities within the region. Only among rental housing units, which make up only 17 percent of estimated future residential development, is there the potential for progress toward fair share redistribution.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
E. G. Goetz, K. Chapple, and B. Lukermann
Enabling Exclusion: The Retreat from Regional Fair Share Housing in the Implementation of the Minnesota Land Use Planning Act
Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2003; 22(3): 213 - 225.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
M. Bowman and M. Howland
Review: Comeback Cities: A Blueprint for Urban Neighborhood Revival, by Paul S. Grogan and Tony Proscio. Boulder, CO: Westview. 2000. 304 pages. $25 (hardback).
Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2003; 22(3): 313 - 315.
[PDF]