Situated on the Kaskaskia River is the community of Vandalia; Illinois; a town proud of its place in history and excited about its future. Vandalia has proved that as the place where Abraham Lincoln began his political career; and the location of the terminus of the Cumberland Road; it is a town of global historical importance.Vandalia; Illinois contains many previously unpublished photographs; and not only highlights Vandalias place in Illinois state politics; but also touches on those unique individuals; families; events; and businesses that helped shape it. Vandalia served as Illinois capital from 1819-1839; when Springfield took over that honor. During the 20 years it served as the capital of Illinois; Vandalia became the starting point for many political and professional careers-most notably a young; beardless Abe Lincoln.
#1409214 in eBooks 2010-09-30 2010-09-30File Name: B00872FOEU
Review
0 of 7 people found the following review helpful. Book PurchaseBy Charlotte P. LiuThe book is just what the profesor needed to teach his course. Thank you.25 of 27 people found the following review helpful. an eye-opener. one of the best books Ive read about sprawlBy Michael LewynIn addition to giving specific examples of how zoning has prevented infill development and compact development. Levine actually shows how these policies matter - that is. how zoning alters the market instead of mimicking it. For example:*Levine shows how rare infill is in single-family zones. Because local politicians rigidly prohibit any attempts to add new housing in already developed single-use zones. single-family neighborhoods are never transformed as a region grows. For example. in Massachusetts only 3 of 351 communities experienced a loss of single-family acres between 1970 and 1999. So as a result. landowners only way of accommodating new housing demand is to build further out in suburbia.*Levine discusses surveys of developers showing that government regulation consistently forces them to make development less compact. 78% of developers responded that regulation was a "significant barrier" to more compact development. By contrast. only 35% cited financing as a barrier. and only 26% cited insufficient market interest.*Levine discusses a survey of renters and homeowners in Boston and Atlanta. asking them to make tradeoffs between space and transit/pedestrian-friendliness. He found that in more sprawling Atlanta. development is actually LESS likely to reflect consumer preferences than in more compact Boston. Among the 25% of people with the most pedestrian-oriented preferences. only 7% lived in the most pedestrian-friendly parts of the metro area (as opposed to 25% in Boston). And of that group. 38% of Atlantans lived in the MOST auto-oriented areas (as opposed to 6% of Bostonians). Why? Perhaps because there is little pre-auto stock in Atlanta- which means that thanks to Atlantas anti-density zoning. pedestrian-friendly housing has never been built in large enough quantities to meet demand. By contrast. in Boston much of the housing stock was built before zoning. which means there is (or more accurately. was before the 2000s housing bubble) an ample supply of pre-auto housing available to meet demand for pedestrian-friendly development.*Levine demolishes the argument that smart-growth planners are forcing people into higher densities. He asserts that this is simply impossible: that planners can mandate high density. but developers can always avoid such a mandate by building elsewhere. By contrast. low-density mandates cant be avoided so easily: developers would rather turn a profit building to (low) allowable densities than not build at all. and low-density zoning is so widespread as to be unavoidable.3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. Refutes Dominant Myths about Zoning and Land MarketsBy TransitStudentThis is an excellent. comprehensive refutation of the idea that the land use we have is a result of free-market choices. The author covers theory. law. and empirical evidence to prove this point that there are societal costs when we exclude people out from where they would like to live. A little bit of background in economics would prove helpful. but the author does such a good job explaining concepts that it is not necessary. It is especially important today because it forcefully counters the dominant narrative in planning and economics.
