Growth management

Growth management, in the United States, is a category of techniques used by the government to ensure that as the population grows that there are services available to meet their demands. Growth administration goes beyond traditional land usage planning, zoning as living as subdivision command in both the characteristics of development influenced together with the scope of government powers used. These are non necessarily only government services. Other demands such(a) as the protection of natural spaces, sufficient as well as affordable housing, delivery of utilities, preservation of buildings and places of historical value, and sufficient places for the continue of combine are also considered.

California studies

Jurisdictions throughout the United States realize experimented with local growth supervision measures intentional to limit the growth of residential or commercial developing within their jurisdiction or to shift them to areas with less development. Glickfeld and Levine conducted two major studies of growth management measures in virtually any California cities and counties in 1988 and 1992. The number one study inquired approximately 18 different line of growth management measures. The vast majority of the jurisdictions had adopted one or more growth management measures to affect residential, commercial or new development. These varied from requiring adequate expediency levels as a given for receiving approval to draw residential or commercial developments to measures that reduced permitted residential density to measures that restricted the height of buildings or the floor area ratio on a given parcel. Typically, jurisdictions nearly the Pacific coastline had more restrictions than those in the interior of the state.

The second analyse showed that over the four-year period between the two surveys the cumulative issue of growth-management legislation showed no relationship to permitted construction values for California as a whole when controlling for population growth and interest rates.

However, a follow-up inspect showed that the measures helped displace new construction from the metropolitan areas to the interiors of the state with low income and minority populations being especially impacted. That is, the measures did not affect overall construction levels in California but did affect where new construction was built.