Smart Growth: The Promise, Politics, and Potential Pitfalls of Emerging Growth Management Strategies
By Oliver A. Pollard, III
INTRODUCTION
There is growing public concern about the adverse impacts of the sprawling land development patterns that have dominated the United States for the past fifty years.1 Although growth can bring jobs, wealth, tax revenues, and amenities, more people are recongizing the link between accelerating suburban sprawl and pervasive problems such as traffic congestion, overcrowded schools, deteriorating neighborhoods, air and water pollution, higher taxes, and the loss of open space, farmland, forests, wetlands, and natural areas. These problems threaten the quality of life in communities that are being transformed by changing development and population patterns, regardless of whether they are declining or struggling to keep pace with growth.
A more nuanced view of economic development is emerging. Citizens and politicians increasingly recognize that they face choices about the pace, scale, and location of development they wish to permit and attract. There is also greater recognition that development decisions are not merely the result of the free market, but are influenced by a broad range of federal, state, and local policies. Further, in a more mobile, information-based economy, it is increasingly evident that the quality of life in an area can have a significant impact on its ability to attract and retain businesses. These changing views of development have sparked efforts throughout the country to capture the benefits of economic growth while minimizing the costs; these efforts involve channeling new growth to existing communities, enhancing the quality or “livability” of communities, and protecting farmland and open space. Many of these strategies and policies are being lumped together under the label “smart growth.”
“Smart growth” is a relatively new term. It began to be discussed around 1994, and it gained wider currency with the adoption of Maryland Governor Parris Glendening's “Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation” initiative in 1997, a package of programs designed to revitalize existing communities, discourage haphazard development, and protect farmland and sensitive environmental areas. In the past few years, smart growth has become a buzzword used in a burgeoning number of articles, reports, conferences, and coalitions, as well as in a host of federal, state, regional, local, and citizen initiatives. Smart growth has reinvigorated growth management discussions, captured politicians' attention, and begun to shape public perceptions of development issues. As a recent National Association of Home Builders' report notes, the smart growth concept has “exploded onto the national consciousness as one of the most critical issues confronting America today.”
Despite the attention and the currency smart growth enjoys, it remains an evolving, relatively amorphous concept whose impact is far from certain. This article will examine three broad issues smart growth raises. Part II of this article seeks to define more clearly the smart growth approach to land use development, both by examining the increasing popularity of this approach and by comparing current strategies to previous efforts to guide growth. Part III identifies and discusses some of the factors that underlie the current public and political appeal of smart growth. Part IV explores the prospects for meaningful smart growth strategies to be adopted and implemented, as well as some of the potential shortcomings of the smart growth approach.
There is growing public concern about the adverse impacts of the sprawling land development patterns that have dominated the United States for the past fifty years.1 Although growth can bring jobs, wealth, tax revenues, and amenities, more people are recongizing the link between accelerating suburban sprawl and pervasive problems such as traffic congestion, overcrowded schools, deteriorating neighborhoods, air and water pollution, higher taxes, and the loss of open space, farmland, forests, wetlands, and natural areas. These problems threaten the quality of life in communities that are being transformed by changing development and population patterns, regardless of whether they are declining or struggling to keep pace with growth.
A more nuanced view of economic development is emerging. Citizens and politicians increasingly recognize that they face choices about the pace, scale, and location of development they wish to permit and attract. There is also greater recognition that development decisions are not merely the result of the free market, but are influenced by a broad range of federal, state, and local policies. Further, in a more mobile, information-based economy, it is increasingly evident that the quality of life in an area can have a significant impact on its ability to attract and retain businesses. These changing views of development have sparked efforts throughout the country to capture the benefits of economic growth while minimizing the costs; these efforts involve channeling new growth to existing communities, enhancing the quality or “livability” of communities, and protecting farmland and open space. Many of these strategies and policies are being lumped together under the label “smart growth.”
“Smart growth” is a relatively new term. It began to be discussed around 1994, and it gained wider currency with the adoption of Maryland Governor Parris Glendening's “Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation” initiative in 1997, a package of programs designed to revitalize existing communities, discourage haphazard development, and protect farmland and sensitive environmental areas. In the past few years, smart growth has become a buzzword used in a burgeoning number of articles, reports, conferences, and coalitions, as well as in a host of federal, state, regional, local, and citizen initiatives. Smart growth has reinvigorated growth management discussions, captured politicians' attention, and begun to shape public perceptions of development issues. As a recent National Association of Home Builders' report notes, the smart growth concept has “exploded onto the national consciousness as one of the most critical issues confronting America today.”
Despite the attention and the currency smart growth enjoys, it remains an evolving, relatively amorphous concept whose impact is far from certain. This article will examine three broad issues smart growth raises. Part II of this article seeks to define more clearly the smart growth approach to land use development, both by examining the increasing popularity of this approach and by comparing current strategies to previous efforts to guide growth. Part III identifies and discusses some of the factors that underlie the current public and political appeal of smart growth. Part IV explores the prospects for meaningful smart growth strategies to be adopted and implemented, as well as some of the potential shortcomings of the smart growth approach.
