2.2 The Smart Growth Theory
2.2.1 A Historical Overview of the Emergence of Smart Growth
Chapin (2012) highlighted the three eras of urban planning that included the Era of Growth Controls between 1950-1975 in the United States (US), Comprehensive Planning between 1975-2000 and the Era of Smart Growth 1990-to present day. However, he argued that a fourth era is emerging namely Sustainable Growth. He listed environmental degradation, infrastructure provision, place making and urban economic development as the main issues of the Smart Growth Era whilst economic development, environmental degradation, climate change and, energy demand and supply are the central themes of the Sustainable Growth Era. It was these forces that propelled New Urbanism and that contributed to the transition into the Smart Growth Era. The American Planning Association (APA) formally launched this approach in the late 1990’s.
In 1996, the Smart Growth Network (SGN) was formed through the coalition of the private sector, public sector and non-governmental partner organisations led by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which now comprises of a consortium of approximately 40 organisations. Knaap and Talen (2005) state that in 1997 the SGN produced a “Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and Management of Change”. Later the Natural Resources Defence Council and the Surface Transportation Policy Project published that year a “Toolkit for Smart Growth”. The International City Management Association (ICMA) that serves as an organisational home to the Smart Growth Network helps facilitate membership programs and support local governments to create sustainable communities through various smart growth activities and programs.
The ICMA indicated that Smart Growth leverages new growth (i.e. not slow/no growth) to improve the quality of life of residents (ICMA 2014). Through their experiences, they have discovered that various features of smart growth that distinguishes communities vary from place to place and that there is no
“one size fits all” solutions to urban problems. Smart Growth channels time and resources to restore the vitality of city centres and older suburbs and is therefore more town-centred. Furthermore, their findings have indicated that only communities who develop a common vision and establish goals defining where they want to go, and translate their values into development plans tend to be more
successful than those who do not. The organisation argues that not all growth and development improves a community’s quality of life. However, it is the implementation of Smart Growth principles that will ensure new developments improves the economic, social and environmental fabric of a community and ultimately will build places where people will want to live.
Talen and Knaap (2003) have stated that over the past decade the principles of interrelated concepts such as Smart Growth, Sustainable Development and New Urbanism have dominated planning practice and scholarship in their support of mixed use, accessibility, public transit and compact urban forms.
Wey and Hsu (2014) pointed out that although New Urbanism and Smart Growth are synonymous; there are significant differences between the two approaches. Firstly, architects and physical planners founded New Urbanism while environmentalists, citizen groups, transportation planners and policy makers initiated Smart Growth. Secondly, the scope of New Urbanism incorporates the function and ethics of the built environment whereas the emphasis of Smart Growth is on planning. Thirdly, Smart Growth does not mean slow/no growth but its central focus is on revitalising the built environment to foster efficient development in its quest to create more liveable communities.
Littman (2004) defined Smart Growth as land use practice that creates more accessible land use patterns that reduce travel time and costs to reach goods and services. This land use pattern results in a more compact urban form, which is an alternative to urban sprawl and thus facilitates the process towards attaining the goals of sustainability. Various studies have confirmed that compact land use patterns also known as Smart Growth reduces infrastructure and service costs as compared to dispersed/sprawling land use patterns. It also produces a variety of social, economic and environmental benefits as illustrated in Table 1 below:-
Table 1: Smart Growth Benefits
SOCIAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL
Improved housing options;
Community cohesion;
Improved transport options;
Mobility, accessibility to goods and services;
Preserves cultural resources (historic sites, traditional neighbourhoods);
Increased physical exercise; and, Health benefits.
Supports industries that depend on high quality environments
(tourism, farming);
Reduces development costs;
Reduces public service costs;
Reduces transportation costs;
Efficient transportation; and.
Economies of agglomeration.
Reduced pollution;
Reduced water pollution;
Reduced heat-island effect;
Increased energy efficiency; and, Greenspaces and habitat
preservation.
Source: Litman, (page 3, 2004)
Resnick (2010) defined Smart Growth as a policy framework that promotes an urban development pattern that is characterised by walkable, bike-able neighbourhoods, high population densities, preserved green spaces, mixed use development, available mass transit and limited road construction.
He suggests that an effective tool that can be used to encourage Smart Growth and discourage urban sprawl is the implementation of a defined Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) that will delimit urban sprawl.
He argued that this will prevent dispersed developments; limit the provision of services within the UGB by targeting growth to areas already serviced by infrastructure and, will protect high potential agricultural/farmlands and green space (see Figure 12 on page 38).
Figure 12: Smart Growth Diagram
Source: http://www.growsmartri.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SG-HEX-Graphic.png
Litman (2015) discussed the differences between the various features of Smart Growth and Urban Sprawl land use patterns as illustrated in the Table 2 below on page 39. He noted that Smart Growth principles could be applied in rural areas to create compact, walkable villages with single or multi-family housing surrounding commercial centres. In large cities it can create dense, mixed-use neighbourhoods located around transit stations i.e. compact, multi-modal developments. In older suburbs, inner cities and existing neighbourhoods these principles encourage incremental infill development whilst in growing cities urban expansion.
Table 2: The Differences between Sprawl and Smart Growth
Source: Litman, (page 3, 2015)
ATTRIBUTES SPRAWL SMART GROWTH
Density Lower density, dispersed activities Higher density, clustered activities Growth Pattern Urban periphery (greenfield)
development
Infill (brownfield) development
Activity Location Commercial, institutional activities are dispersed
Commercial, institutional activities are concentrated
Land use mix Homogeneous, single use, segregated Mixed land uses Scale Large scale, larger buildings, blocks,
wide roads, less detail
Human scale, Smaller buildings, blocks and roads - design details for pedestrians
Transport Automobile-oriented poorly suited for walking, cycling and transit
Multi-modal transportation that support walking, cycling and public transport
Connectivity Hierarchical road network with loops, dead-end streets and unconnected sidewalks
Highly connected roads, sidewalks and paths
Street Design Streets designed to maximize motor vehicle traffic volume and speed.
Streets designed to accommodate a variety of activities. Traffic calming.
Planning Process Unplanned with little coordination between jurisdictions and stakeholders
Planned and coordinated between jurisdictions and stakeholders
Public Space Emphasis on the private realm (yards, shopping, malls, gated communities, private clubs)
Emphasis on public realm (streetscapes, sidewalks, parks, public facilities)
Services (Shops, schools, and parks)
Regional, consolidated, larger.
Requires automobile access
Local, distributed, smaller.
Accommodates walking access.