The incorrect concept that sprawl is automatically a bad thing skews a lot of reporting on the normal growth patterns of growing cities.
Here is a book review from the ARPPS Newsletter in January 2007 that puts a different face on it.
Book Review
Sprawl: A compact history. Robert Bruegmann (2005). Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
Sprawl, the animating core of the idea that suburbs, roads to them, and the other technologies delivering necessities, like dams, canals, power lines, etc., are intrinsically destructive and we should all be living piled up on top of one another in cities while walking and biking to work, shopping, church, and recreation; is demolished by this marshalling of facts that show the ancient draw of suburbs—it is how we want to live—in this wonderful book from an art professor and urban scholar.
The difference between living in an overly urban environment with little evidence of the natural world—though it is very energy efficient—that downtowns present; or in a suburban/exurban environment surrounded by the natural world—which technology keeps making more energy efficient—is the difference between quality and quantity and quality of life is obviously what attracts the overwhelming majority of people to the suburbs and has for generations.
The author is a professor of art history, architecture, and urban planning, bringing a delightful mix of disciplines to this study that overturns several urban myths, such as Los Angeles being the poster child of sprawl:
“The notion that Phoenix and Las Vegas and Los Angeles are among the country’s most sprawling places is also problematic at best. Los Angeles, for example, often taken to be the epitome of sprawl, has become so much denser over the past fifty years that it is now America’s most densely populated urbanized area, as measured by the census bureau. It is considerably denser than the New York or Chicago urbanized areas, for example.” (p. 5)
In his research for the book he found that the arguments against sprawl, the “sprawl crusade” as he terms it:
“[H]ad generated a great deal of heat but not much light and was primarily of interest to a small group of academics…then in the mid-1990’s…the anti-sprawl crusade suddenly caught fire…Virtually overnight the anti-sprawl reformers’ new catchphrase “smart growth” seemed to be everywhere.” (p. 8)
However he found a much more positive history and discovered:
“[T]hat sprawl is neither a recent phenomena nor peculiarly American, as many reformers argue. It is, instead, merely the latest chapter in a story as old as cities themselves and just as apparent in imperial Rome, the Paris of Louis XIV, or London between the world wars as it is in today’s Atlanta or Las Vegas, or, for that matter, contemporary Paris or Rome. I try to show that our understanding of urban development is woefully out of date because it is based on old and obsolete assumptions about cities, suburbs, and rural area. In fact, I argue that many of the problems that are usually blamed on sprawl—traffic congestion, for example—are, if anything, the result of the slowing of sprawl and increasing density in urban areas.” (pp. 9-10)
Much of the discussion around sprawl revolves around that which affects most of us, traffic congestion, but what the author discovered was the opposite of what had been proposed. He found that the suggested solutions to traffic congestion, mass transportation , light rail in particular, actually made the congestion worse and he found this in the city often used as a model of smart growth policies.
“[V]oters were promised that the Portland light rail system, the crown jewel in the Portland planning system, would relieve highway congestion, strengthen downtown, and help in the creation of new high-density mixed-use centers around the metropolitan area. However, despite billions of dollars in construction costs, much of it subsidized by federal funding, the percentage of Portland area residents taking public transportation has continued to decline. With transit use accounting for less than 2 percent of all trips in the region, it remains a fairly negligible factor in the vast majority of the metropolitan area.
“Critics further charge that the light rail system, like virtually every rail system in American in the last several decades, not only came in heavily over budget and failed to live up to ridership projections but also siphoned off scarce transportation dollars from all other transportation modes, particularly the more heavily used, more flexible, and more cost-effective buses. They also point to its slow speed and the fact that it was designed as a way to take commuters in and out of downtown, which houses a continually declining percentage of the jobs in the metropolitan area. Finally, they charge, as the population has grown and the region has failed to keep up with the building of new roads, roadway congestion has gotten much worse even on the highways that parallel the new light rail lines.” (pp. 212-213)
With all of the criticism or the anti-sprawl arguments he levels in this very readable work, he closes with a warm acknowledgement of the wonders of urban living:
“More than any other human artifact in the world today, our urban areas are the result of the actions of every citizen, every group, and every institution, every day. In its immense complexity and constant change, the city—whether dense and concentrated at the core, looser and more sprawling in suburbia, or in the vast tracts of exurban penumbra that extend dozens, even hundreds, of miles into what appears to be rural land—is the grandest and most marvelous world of mankind.” (p. 225)
A fine way to conclude a fine book.
Reviewed by David H. Lukenbill
_______________
Editorial: South county troubles
Why is Elk Grove so eager to sprawl?
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, June 11, 2007
The new Elk Grove City Council has done some good things in recent months, entering negotiations to end a needless dispute with the local community services district and launching a dialogue with nearby Galt about a permanent greenbelt.
But the council seems out of touch with its own growth-weary constituents by rushing to expand the city limits southward when so many traffic problems exist. The situation has the distinct aroma of two new council members, Gary Davis and Patrick Hume, complying with development interests that backed their candidacies.
