Conflating land-use regulation with smart growth

In a new report, anti-smart-growth zeolot Wendell Cox conflates restrictive land-use regulation, including large-lot zoning, with smart growth. It's not news that Cox doesn't like land-use regulations — but his arguments that they are equivalent to smart growth are hogwash.

He writes: "More restrictive land use regulation is variously referred to as "smart growth," "growth management" and other terms. More restrictive land use regulation is estimated to have added from nearly $30,000 (in Minneapolis-St. Paul) to more than $220,000 (In San Diego) to the price of a new home."

He describes spefically what he means by more restrictive land use regulation: "Urban growth boundaries, limits on the number of houses that can be built, large lot zoning and excessive development impact fees and the like are regulation strategies that increase the cost of land for building houses. These land cost increases are not the result of more rapidly rising construction costs or underlying market forces such as consumer demand."

Smart growth advocates have been arguing for years against excessive large-lot zoning. Cox, on the other hand, has been a defender of sprawl — which has been driven in large part due to large-lot zoning, setback requirements, and restrictions on housing types and uses that limit the number and variety of houses and communities that can be built.