Growth Management in Urban Planning

Smart Growth

Chinitz (1990) examines the fallacy of composition in the context of land policy and growth management. The basic idea of the fallacy is that what is good for the individual is not necessarily good for society as a whole—with the normal application of the fallacy relating to interest rates: high rates might benefit one with savings—but overall high rates tend to induce recession, which is bad for the whole. The same concept is what Chinitz (1990) uses when looking at land policy and managing growth: his argument, however, is that unmanaged growth manifests itself in two ways—either in using the wrong land, or in using land the wrong way. Based on this analysis, he concludes that local growth management efforts do not contribute to larger national problems; in short, he does not subscribe to the idea that policies that limit development in individual towns or cities can have negative impacts on the overall economic growth of the nation. Chinitz (1990) points out that critics believe that if every town implements strict growth management policies, then the cumulative effect could be a slowdown in economic growth at the national level, as well as higher housing costs and increased income inequality, on top of environmental problems galore.

Chinitz (1990) argues instead that growth management policies may be effective in controlling growth in individual towns, while admitting that the broader economy’s issues might not be solved by such management. For instance, zoning restrictions and development caps, can limit the amount of new housing and commercial development in individual towns or cities. This can lead to higher housing costs, reduced availability of affordable housing, and limited job opportunities in those areas. Thus, if every town implements such policies, then the cumulative effect could be a slowdown in economic growth at the national level.

On the other hand, in supply-driven market, sprawl tends to naturally occur, as Neuman (1991) points out. Neuman also notes that “functional integrity is based on sustainability” (p. 345. In other words, so long as a space can function, it is integral and healthy. It is only when it is unable to function that it becomes a problem. This idea connects to what the basic biblical principle of functioning sustainably, and the need to care for the earth and its resources. In Genesis 2:15, God gives Adam the responsibility to "tend and keep" the Garden of Eden. Is this not also like management, and is not smart management essentially similar to what Neuman argues? Similarly, in Psalm 24:1, it is stated that "The earth is the Lord's, and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein." These passages emphasize the importance of responsible stewardship of the earth and its resources. So long as everything is funtioning and sustainable, it is not broken.

However, it is important to note that growth management policies are often implemented to address negative externalities of growth, such as traffic congestion, environmental degradation, and loss of open space. These policies seek to manage growth in a way that is sustainable and beneficial in the long-term. Therefore, while growth management policies may have short-term impacts on individual towns or cities, the long-term benefits of sustainable development and growth management can outweigh the short-term costs.

Also, it is important to consider the potential benefits of growth management policies on the broader economy. For example, promoting compact, walkable development can reduce transportation costs, enhance the attractiveness of an area to businesses and residents, and promote economic growth. Neuman decries the myth of sprawl—but sprawl is a reality for those who live in it, experience the congestion, and understand the ennui that fills the air in such places. So it is important to consider the broader impacts of growth management policies when evaluating their potential effects on not just the economy but also the spirit of a place.

That is why, in response, Fischel (1991) argues that Chinitz's claim ignores the fact that growth management policies are actually smart because they tend to be applied so as to prevent other problems—such as the above-mentioned issues, i.e., traffic congestion, pollution, and loss of open space. Fischel maintains that growth management policies are not necessarily anti-growth, but rather seek to manage growth in a way that is sustainable and beneficial in the long-term. Again, this is what the Bible teaches: “The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully” (2 Corinthians 9:6).

The idea of smart growth is based on the principles of sustainable development, which seeks to balance economic growth with social and environmental sustainability. Smart growth advocates for compact, walkable, and transit-oriented development, as well as the preservation of open space and the promotion of mixed-use development. These policies are designed to reduce sprawl, promote economic development, and enhance quality of life. Sprawl may or may not be a myth in terms of how it is defined: but reality is reality, and one knows the negatives when one feels them.