Growth Management in the San Francisco Bay Area: Interdependence of Theory and Practice

Growth management has been part of US land use planning practice for decades, and a large number of activities has been developed and applied over time. The rather fragmented toolbox comprises traditional activities, like growth caps and urban growth boundaries, in conjunction with smart approaches such as transit oriented development and new urbanism-related design features. The emphasis of growth management research has been to highlight the different programs enacted at state and/or local levels. Because the scope of growth management requires myriad different tools, land use researchers must keep pace with emerging approaches, and this paper contributes to that discussion. The analytical aspect, however, will be elaborated through theoretical planning considerations.Putting the two realms together -— planning theory and stakeholders’ experiences —- are both rather new approaches in growth management research. This paper examines both the theoretical and empirical sides of growth management. The first component deals with discrepancies in the practice–theory discourse concerning growth management by developing a research framework for characterizing growth management strategies based on theoretical concepts. One of the principal challenges is to find a common denominator in planning theory that has the potential to serve as a bridging philosophy. The principle of interdependence is a starting point for these considerations. The second component of this paper assesses the underlying goals of growth management and analyzes different methods in use, including their advantages and disadvantages, in planning practice in the San Francisco Bay Area