62:, making it an excellent subject to examine the effects of such developments. Additionally, western cities are typically less built-up and enclosed versus northeastern and midwestern cities, making leapfrog developments and their effects more noticeable. Starting in the 1940s, developers in Arizona began to develop communities a considerable distance away from Phoenix as the land prices were very low. These communities are categorized as leapfrog developments as a substantial amount of land was “skipped” over.
1381:
1369:
1403:
84:
In 1980, the state and local governments in
Arizona passed the Arizona Groundwater Management Act, making leapfrogging in more remote Arizona areas more difficult. Under this act, developments were required to show they had access to a one-hundred-year supply of water that would not contribute to the
105:
However, results of an
Arizona task force show that the impact fees would not have a significant effect on homeowners. Impact fees were unlikely to drastically increase home prices, "with a $ 3,000 fee the increase in the monthly mortgage payment for a 30-year level payments loan at 10 percent would
71:
opportunities within these communities, people living in these developments had to commute, which created concerns about an increase in pollution. Additionally, it was found to be expensive to extend gas, sewage, and water lines from the city and its neighboring areas to the new distant communities.
121:
Phoenix's infill housing program may be working slowly because infill developments transpire more slowly than other types of developments. A study of leapfrog developments in
Maryland found that infill developments occur at an annual rate of about one percent, meaning that the skipped over land is
117:
Phoenix's Infill
Housing Program started in 1995. The program used incentives to encourage building developments or homes on land between leapfrog developments and the city that had been "skipped" over. These incentives included eliminating some or all of the cost of fees for permits, zoning, and
101:
Developers and those opposed to the development impact fees argued that these fees would hurt the home buyers by increasing the cost of properties. Additionally, they argued that the fees could hurt lower-income families due to rising rents and delays in the construction of new affordable housing
97:
The cost of extending infrastructure can be exorbitant, so many places like
Phoenix issued development impact fees. Developers would subject to these fees if they built new communities distant from the city. The additional expense discouraged leapfrog developments and removed at least part of the
70:
Phoenix's earlier planned communities provided amenities, but that did not prevent problems from arising later. For instance, developers planned on bringing businesses, jobs, libraries, and other amenities to these communities but could not meet the growing demand. Due to the limited employment
31:
Leapfrog development can occur for numerous reasons. Often, developers are more likely to hold onto land closer to cities and instead develop less valuable land further from urban centers. Moreover, some developers prefer to build in large open areas as it can be easier and less restricted than
40:
Leapfrog developments can have several common problems, including vacant land left between cities and developments, inefficient land distribution, increased pollution due to an increase in traffic and congestion, and the extension of amenities that can be costly.
49:
When leapfrogging occurs, infill development often follows. The eventual development of the vacant land between the city and the leapfrog development is called infill. As infill development increases, leapfrog development will eventually slow over time.
22:
occurs when developers skip over land to obtain cheaper land further away from cities, thus, leaving huge areas empty between the city and the new development. It can be seen when it comes to the development or urbanization of more rural areas.
106:
be $ 52.70." The only instance in which homeowners and low-income families would be negatively affected would be a situation in which the impact fees increased drastically. but this scenario is judged as unlikely to occur.
171:
Akher, S. T., & Noon, M. H. (2016). Modeling spillover effects of leapfrog development and urban sprawls upon institutional delinquencies: A case for
Pakistan. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216,
32:
building in cities. Other reasons for leapfrog development include household preferences, available amenities, minimized commutation costs and the costs and regulations involved in construction.
89:. Effectively, this meant that developers had to rely heavily on municipal water-lines, making it far more costly for them to expand in areas distant from existing municipalities.
155:
Chen, Yong, et al. “Market
Thinness, Income Sorting and Leapfrog Development across the Urban-Rural Gradient.” Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 66, 2017, pp. 213–223.,
109:
Phoenix decided to suspend these development impact fees in a section of the city due to fear that several commercial developments would leave and opt to develop elsewhere.
198:
Heim, Carol E. “Leapfrogging, Urban Sprawl, and Growth
Management: Phoenix, 1950–2000.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 60, no. 1, 2001, pp. 245–283.,
1213:
118:
water, as well as a potentially expedited development process. Phoenix's mayor stated that the Infill
Housing Program seems to be successful, but progress is slow.
869:
102:
units. Another concern was that impact fees would cause people, businesses, and the associated tax revenue to move to areas without development impact fees.
143:
Irwin, E., Zhang, W., & Wrenn, D. (2012, November 4). Tests of the urban economic model using a new measure of leapfrog development. Retrieved from
1160:
441:
233:
144:
1260:
1193:
512:
657:
263:
1270:
1038:
909:
464:
1265:
1153:
535:
314:
998:
1148:
614:
507:
469:
226:
1229:
1208:
1183:
1234:
1203:
634:
517:
492:
258:
1406:
1396:
365:
268:
253:
1255:
1239:
1198:
1143:
1073:
1018:
844:
422:
412:
407:
145:
https://www.academia.edu/2600520/Tests_of_the_urban_economic_model_using_a_new_measure_of_leapfrog_development
1429:
1385:
1347:
1332:
1188:
1078:
687:
574:
502:
484:
474:
219:
1391:
1327:
1083:
805:
642:
451:
359:
1302:
1113:
919:
859:
754:
864:
800:
584:
527:
459:
884:
821:
795:
604:
589:
1103:
785:
324:
1297:
1123:
928:
748:
579:
569:
497:
433:
386:
354:
329:
319:
294:
1322:
1008:
719:
672:
619:
370:
199:
156:
59:
1352:
1312:
1058:
1013:
943:
667:
662:
983:
98:
hefty financial burden the city bore by extending infrastructure for these developments.
1063:
1043:
1023:
1003:
993:
988:
933:
830:
826:
815:
647:
624:
564:
242:
160:
1423:
1373:
1342:
1337:
1307:
1118:
1068:
973:
904:
894:
879:
810:
764:
743:
704:
677:
417:
376:
1292:
1053:
1048:
938:
924:
889:
840:
736:
695:
609:
599:
381:
86:
1108:
1033:
914:
899:
874:
724:
714:
1028:
709:
284:
1317:
947:
790:
203:
769:
759:
731:
699:
652:
391:
309:
304:
58:
There are plenty of leapfrog developments outside of the urban center of
849:
952:
835:
299:
594:
211:
289:
215:
1283:
1248:
1222:
1176:
1169:
1136:
1096:
972:
965:
778:
686:
633:
557:
548:
526:
483:
450:
432:
400:
347:
338:
277:
227:
8:
1173:
969:
554:
344:
234:
220:
212:
122:developed at about one percent per year.
442:Regional Planning Association of America
54:Leapfrog development in Phoenix, Arizona
131:
112:
7:
1402:
194:
192:
190:
188:
186:
184:
182:
180:
178:
139:
137:
135:
513:Professional transportation planner
161:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2017.07.001
80:Arizona Groundwater Management Act
14:
1401:
1380:
1379:
1367:
113:Phoenix's infill housing program
910:Transferable development rights
465:Environmental impact assessment
536:Community economic development
315:Planning and zoning commission
1:
1149:Planning Accreditation Board
508:Transit-oriented development
470:Recreation resource planning
75:Arizona government response
1446:
1161:Professional organizations
518:Urban freight distribution
493:Transportation forecasting
1397:List of planning journals
1361:
366:History of urban planning
249:
1333:Marine spatial planning
845:Healthy community design
423:Village design statement
413:Preservation development
408:Conservation development
87:depletion of groundwater
66:Common issues in Phoenix
1348:Real estate development
1079:List of urban theorists
575:City Beautiful movement
503:Rational planning model
485:Transportation planning
475:Sustainable development
204:10.1111/1536-7150.00063
93:Development impact fees
45:Infill housing programs
1392:List of planned cities
1328:Landscape architecture
1084:List of urban planners
806:Conservation community
643:Collaborative planning
452:Environmental planning
360:Comprehensive planning
1303:Development economics
1154:Real estate education
1114:James Howard Kunstler
1039:Konstantinos Doxiadis
920:Urban growth boundary
860:Mixed-use development
755:Intentional community
855:Leapfrog development
801:Complete Communities
658:Intelligent urbanism
585:Garden city movement
528:Economic development
460:Environmental design
20:Leapfrog development
16:Urbanization process
1261:Communist countries
885:Planning Permission
822:Filtering (housing)
796:Cluster development
605:Settlement movement
590:Indigenous planning
1144:Planning education
1104:Elizabeth Farrelly
948:High-rise urbanism
786:Affordable housing
325:World Urbanism Day
1417:
1416:
1374:Cities portal
1298:Civil engineering
1279:
1278:
1132:
1131:
961:
960:
929:Peri-urbanisation
749:Planned community
580:Dark-sky movement
570:Car-free movement
544:
543:
498:Trip distribution
434:Regional planning
387:Urban green space
355:Land-use planning
330:Labor market area
320:Growth management
295:Metropolitan area
1437:
1405:
1404:
1383:
1382:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1323:Land development
1174:
1009:Donald Appleyard
970:
720:Mining community
673:Radical planning
620:Transition towns
555:
371:Spatial planning
345:
236:
229:
222:
213:
206:
196:
173:
169:
163:
153:
147:
141:
60:Phoenix, Arizona
1445:
1444:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1413:
1368:
1366:
1357:
1353:Social sciences
1313:Urban economics
1285:
1275:
1244:
1218:
1165:
1128:
1092:
1059:Peter Calthorpe
1014:Ebenezer Howard
975:
957:
944:Verticalization
774:
682:
668:Market urbanism
663:Livable streets
629:
550:
540:
522:
479:
446:
428:
396:
340:
334:
273:
245:
240:
210:
209:
197:
176:
170:
166:
154:
150:
142:
133:
128:
115:
95:
82:
77:
68:
56:
47:
38:
29:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1443:
1441:
1433:
1432:
1430:Urban planning
1422:
1421:
1415:
1414:
1412:
1411:
1399:
1394:
1389:
1377:
1362:
1359:
1358:
1356:
1355:
1350:
1345:
1340:
1335:
1330:
1325:
1320:
1315:
1310:
1305:
1300:
1295:
1289:
1287:
1281:
1280:
1277:
1276:
1274:
1273:
1268:
1263:
1258:
1252:
1250:
1246:
1245:
1243:
1242:
1237:
1232:
1226:
1224:
1220:
1219:
1217:
1216:
1214:United Kingdom
1211:
1206:
1201:
1196:
1194:Czech Republic
1191:
1186:
1180:
1178:
1171:
1167:
1166:
1164:
1163:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1151:
1140:
1138:
1134:
1133:
1130:
1129:
1127:
1126:
1124:Randal O'Toole
1121:
1116:
1111:
1106:
1100:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1091:
1090:
1087:
1086:
1081:
1076:
1071:
1066:
1064:Patrick Geddes
1061:
1056:
1051:
1046:
1044:Kevin A. Lynch
1041:
1036:
1031:
1026:
1024:Guy Benveniste
1021:
1016:
1011:
1006:
1004:Daniel Burnham
1001:
999:Colin Buchanan
996:
994:Clarence Stein
991:
989:Clarence Perry
986:
980:
978:
967:
963:
962:
959:
958:
956:
955:
950:
941:
936:
934:Urban vitality
931:
922:
917:
912:
907:
902:
897:
892:
887:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
857:
852:
847:
841:Healthy cities
838:
833:
831:Brusselization
827:Gentrification
824:
819:
816:Eminent domain
813:
808:
803:
798:
793:
788:
782:
780:
776:
775:
773:
772:
767:
762:
757:
752:
746:
741:
740:
739:
729:
728:
727:
717:
712:
707:
702:
692:
690:
688:Cities by type
684:
683:
681:
680:
675:
670:
665:
660:
655:
650:
648:Context theory
645:
639:
637:
631:
630:
628:
627:
622:
617:
612:
607:
602:
597:
592:
587:
582:
577:
572:
567:
565:Athens Charter
561:
559:
552:
546:
545:
542:
541:
539:
538:
532:
530:
524:
523:
521:
520:
515:
510:
505:
500:
495:
489:
487:
481:
480:
478:
477:
472:
467:
462:
456:
454:
448:
447:
445:
444:
438:
436:
430:
429:
427:
426:
420:
415:
410:
404:
402:
398:
397:
395:
394:
389:
384:
379:
374:
368:
363:
357:
351:
349:
342:
336:
335:
333:
332:
327:
322:
317:
312:
307:
302:
297:
292:
287:
281:
279:
275:
274:
272:
271:
266:
261:
256:
250:
247:
246:
243:Urban planning
241:
239:
238:
231:
224:
216:
208:
207:
174:
164:
148:
130:
129:
127:
124:
114:
111:
94:
91:
81:
78:
76:
73:
67:
64:
55:
52:
46:
43:
37:
34:
28:
25:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1442:
1431:
1428:
1427:
1425:
1410:
1409:
1400:
1398:
1395:
1393:
1390:
1388:
1387:
1378:
1376:
1375:
1364:
1363:
1360:
1354:
1351:
1349:
1346:
1344:
1343:Public policy
1341:
1339:
1338:Public health
1336:
1334:
1331:
1329:
1326:
1324:
1321:
1319:
1316:
1314:
1311:
1309:
1308:Urban ecology
1306:
1304:
1301:
1299:
1296:
1294:
1291:
1290:
1288:
1282:
1272:
1271:Ancient Egypt
1269:
1267:
1264:
1262:
1259:
1257:
1254:
1253:
1251:
1247:
1241:
1238:
1236:
1233:
1231:
1228:
1227:
1225:
1221:
1215:
1212:
1210:
1207:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1197:
1195:
1192:
1190:
1187:
1185:
1182:
1181:
1179:
1175:
1172:
1168:
1162:
1159:
1155:
1152:
1150:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1142:
1141:
1139:
1135:
1125:
1122:
1120:
1119:Lewis Mumford
1117:
1115:
1112:
1110:
1107:
1105:
1102:
1101:
1099:
1095:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1082:
1080:
1077:
1075:
1072:
1070:
1069:Raymond Unwin
1067:
1065:
1062:
1060:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1050:
1047:
1045:
1042:
1040:
1037:
1035:
1032:
1030:
1027:
1025:
1022:
1020:
1017:
1015:
1012:
1010:
1007:
1005:
1002:
1000:
997:
995:
992:
990:
987:
985:
982:
981:
979:
977:
976:practitioners
971:
968:
964:
954:
951:
949:
945:
942:
940:
937:
935:
932:
930:
926:
923:
921:
918:
916:
913:
911:
908:
906:
905:Tract housing
903:
901:
898:
896:
895:Temporary use
893:
891:
888:
886:
883:
881:
880:Planning gain
878:
876:
873:
871:
868:
866:
863:
861:
858:
856:
853:
851:
848:
846:
842:
839:
837:
834:
832:
828:
825:
823:
820:
817:
814:
812:
811:Creative city
809:
807:
804:
802:
799:
797:
794:
792:
789:
787:
784:
783:
781:
777:
771:
768:
766:
765:Urban village
763:
761:
758:
756:
753:
750:
747:
745:
744:Model village
742:
738:
735:
734:
733:
730:
726:
723:
722:
721:
718:
716:
713:
711:
708:
706:
705:Commuter town
703:
701:
697:
694:
693:
691:
689:
685:
679:
678:Urban renewal
676:
674:
671:
669:
666:
664:
661:
659:
656:
654:
651:
649:
646:
644:
641:
640:
638:
636:
632:
626:
623:
621:
618:
616:
615:Structuralism
613:
611:
608:
606:
603:
601:
598:
596:
593:
591:
588:
586:
583:
581:
578:
576:
573:
571:
568:
566:
563:
562:
560:
556:
553:
547:
537:
534:
533:
531:
529:
525:
519:
516:
514:
511:
509:
506:
504:
501:
499:
496:
494:
491:
490:
488:
486:
482:
476:
473:
471:
468:
466:
463:
461:
458:
457:
455:
453:
449:
443:
440:
439:
437:
435:
431:
424:
421:
419:
418:Rural housing
416:
414:
411:
409:
406:
405:
403:
399:
393:
390:
388:
385:
383:
380:
378:
377:Redevelopment
375:
372:
369:
367:
364:
361:
358:
356:
353:
352:
350:
346:
343:
337:
331:
328:
326:
323:
321:
318:
316:
313:
311:
308:
306:
303:
301:
298:
296:
293:
291:
288:
286:
283:
282:
280:
276:
270:
267:
265:
262:
260:
257:
255:
252:
251:
248:
244:
237:
232:
230:
225:
223:
218:
217:
214:
205:
201:
195:
193:
191:
189:
187:
185:
183:
181:
179:
175:
168:
165:
162:
158:
152:
149:
146:
140:
138:
136:
132:
125:
123:
119:
110:
107:
103:
99:
92:
90:
88:
79:
74:
72:
65:
63:
61:
53:
51:
44:
42:
36:Common issues
35:
33:
26:
24:
21:
1407:
1384:
1365:
1293:Architecture
1266:Nazi Germany
1074:Thomas Adams
1054:Loretta Lees
1049:Le Corbusier
1019:Edmund Bacon
984:Andrés Duany
939:Urbanization
925:Urban sprawl
890:Rural flight
870:Permeability
865:Model cities
854:
737:Logging camp
696:Company town
610:Smart growth
600:New Urbanism
382:Urban design
167:
151:
120:
116:
108:
104:
100:
96:
83:
69:
57:
48:
39:
30:
19:
18:
1286:disciplines
1109:Jane Jacobs
1034:James Rouse
915:Urban decay
900:Third place
875:Placemaking
725:Pit village
715:Global city
1029:Ian McHarg
974:Theorists/
751:(New town)
710:Ghost town
549:Concepts/
285:Urban area
126:References
1318:Geography
1230:Barcelona
1209:Singapore
1184:Australia
1177:Countries
791:Cityscape
558:Movements
27:Mechanism
1424:Category
1386:Category
1235:Shanghai
1137:Training
779:Concepts
770:Boomtown
760:Arcology
732:Man camp
700:Monotown
653:Ekistics
635:Theories
551:theories
392:Urbanism
341:branches
310:Planning
305:Land use
259:Theories
172:274-294.
1408:Commons
1284:Related
1097:Critics
850:LEED-ND
348:General
278:General
269:Outline
254:History
1256:Africa
1240:Sydney
1223:Cities
1204:Serbia
1199:Russia
1170:Places
966:People
953:Zoning
836:Infill
300:Suburb
1249:Other
1189:China
625:YIMBY
595:NIMBY
401:Rural
373:(Eur)
339:Major
264:Index
818:(US)
425:(UK)
362:(US)
290:City
200:doi
157:doi
1426::
946:/
927:/
843:/
829:/
698:/
177:^
134:^
235:e
228:t
221:v
202::
159::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.