What would happen if no more population was allowed in a metro area or growth was greatly slowed? (major, development)

[the city]

Theoretically speaking, what would happen if water was running out or some other major cause would halt growth in an area like the LA valley? Would people flock to small towns? If population was more evenly spread our current small towns be bigger than they are now or would the creation of more small towns pop up? Everyone floods into cities for jobs and because of everything cities offer. Are small towns going to remain small while the cities get more spread and built up?

[OuttaTheLouBurbs]

Unless there was some kind of cataclysmic event affecting all large metro areas, people will just flock to another metro area that suits their needs. No one is really interested in moving to small rural towns, and we are long past the era of the creation of new towns/cities.

[Hemlock140]

Look at the San Francisco Bay Area. It was not a catastrophe but rather high prices that caused the great expansion of affordable home development in places like Tracy and Stockton, with people willing to commute 2 hours each way to afford a home. Those were the areas hardest hit in the recession, when people got laid off from their lower middle class jobs and there were no local jobs to turn to. Just as people move to where the jobs are, causing growth in housing, large employers
build offices and factories where there are workers available. We are already seeing some of the smaller cities in WA state gain significant or major employers due to the number of workers available and less expensive land/taxes/utilities, such as
Moses Lake (BMW Carbon Fiber Plant).