Zoning has shaping effects on local society. Zoning ordinances may properly relegate business to one section of town and residences to another, or they may permit certain businesses to exist in residential areas (e.g., grocery stores), and certain types of residences in business areas (e.g., apartments and hotels).

Effects of zoning and subdivision regulations are illustrated by the establishment of minimum lot size, which in turn goes a long way toward determining the kind of a house to be built on the tract. Minimum distances between houses and the amount of set-back from the property line are specified. These factors have a major effect upon land use. By these means, the public, through local government zoning rules, narrows the range within which a private owner can make his own choice. It follows that some individual freedom of choice in land use is lost for the good of the community. According to historian Robert Freilich, "The constantly increasing density of our urban populations, the multiplying forms of industry, and the growing complexity of our civilization make it necessary for the state, either directly or through some public agency by its sanction, to limit individual activities to a greater extent than formerly."

The growth ethic has been and is a dominant force in the American mentality. The idea that ever increasing growth and economic development are a necessary and desirable objective is coming under criticism from many directions. Many people, from citizens to city planners to senators, are concerned about protecting the environment and conserving finite resources. Yet there appears to be significant factionalism over environmental protection. To the Bush administration, for instance, policies geared toward controls to protect the environment resembled brakes on economic growth and were viewed with great caution.

It can be said that there is a growing public consciousness over issues of quality as opposed to long-standing concepts of quantity. From my point of view, historian Dallas Miner hits the mood of American middle-class environmentalism succinctly when he points out "the desire of most Americans to live in a single-family detached house in a socially compatible neighborhood, free from crime, congestion, and other ills that are commonly classified as products of a declining urban environment."

Despite the fact that the majority of Americans still live in the larger cities, they express a desire to live in less densely populated areas. "A 1970 Gallup Poll found that only 18% of the adults surveyed preferred to live in cities, while 26% preferred the suburbs, 31% preferred small towns, and 24% listed farms as a preferred living environment." During the 60s and 70s there was a flight from the cities to the suburbs and the suburban fringe. It is in middle-class suburban areas that the concept of growth management emerged out of the failure of traditional land use management controls to protect people's concerns for the quality of life.

Ever since concerns for environmental quality escalated in the early 70s, new techniques in urban planning have been implemented to provide open space and other social amenities that add quality to the living environment. Increasing concern is also being given to social equity issues, such as the provision of housing opportunities for all income groups. There is increasing interest at all levels of government in achieving better methods for balancing these elements and others, so as to meet the diverse needs of a changing society.

Another aspect of land use management is planning for natural space. In response to public opinion, nearly all levels of government have initiated programs for planning and managing natural land resources. A few years back, Congress commissioned a task force to identify environmentally sensitive areas and outline guidelines to insure their protection. It has become very difficult for local governments to locate new dump sites for the enormous amounts of rubbish produced by our throw-it-away society.