Nature in the suburbs: Open space preservation, fiscal planning, and exclusion

This dissertation focuses on the question of what motivates municipal open space acquisition. I hypothesize that preservation is undertaken by municipalities in terms of their own fiscal interest, and not as part of a regional, environmentally-driven planning effort. The first chapter outlines the historical appropriation of nature in general, and open space in particular, by suburban communities for exclusionary ends. I then review the two (broadly construed) reasons used to legitimize open space preservation: environmental concerns and fiscal incentives (both municipal and homeowner). Methodologically, my dissertation is a blend of quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative portion establishes the general determinants of local open space preservation patterns and the evidence for fiscally and exclusionary motivated acquisition. I show that much local acquisition is income elastic and largely a reaction to growth pressure. I also present evidence that municipalities disproportionately target land zoned for high-density development in their preservation efforts. Furthermore, I demonstrate that open space acquisition and municipal attempts to shirk their affordable housing obligation are correlated. I conclude that this behavior is legitimized by both the state and the planning profession.; During the qualitative portion of the dissertation, I undertake three municipal level case studies (Hopewell, Holmdel, and East Brunswick Township) in which I identify a number of actors and events involved in bringing open space into the public dialogue. I demonstrate how actors transform the debate over open space from property rights to quality of life, and are able to capitalize on a localized development threat to achieve a more favorable political environment. I argue that local preservation has received widespread support in part because advocates have framed it as a fiscal policy tool to prevent undesirable development. I also present evidence that each of these communities have become more exclusive places, and furthermore, there is little recognition or acknowledgement of the exclusionary consequences of open space preservation by those undertaking the preservation. The lack of recognition is exacerbated because local acquisition is often seen as the product of local, democratic actions and public participation, and has therefore never been problematized.