The Nature of Urban Sprawl

Land-use planning and conservation is a topic that I am passionate about. Growing up in a rural town, year after year I watched forested land cleared for new subdivisions and once-functioning farmland run vacant, plotted with 'for sale' signs. (The American Farmland Trust estimates that 46 acres of farmland are lost every hour!) Yes, we have an ever-increasing population and those people need a place to live. But does population growth necessitate the patterns of land-use and consumption that we've seen in these recent decades?

The most significant growth and development changes in the United States are marked predominantly by the aftermath of World War II. From this point, development and growth has taken form as divided land and single-family subdivisions distanced from the places where people work, shop, and play. Additionally, rates of population growth are severely out of balance with land consumption. For example, in the Milwaukee metropolitan area between 1970 and 1990, the population grew at approximately three percent. Correspondingly, land consumption grew at a rate of thirty-eight percent. In Los Angeles over this same time period, population growth figured at forty-five percent while land use increased three-hundred percent. (Cieslewicz) But it is not just the excessive consumption of this land that is a problem – it’s the way in which the land is developed. Consumption of open space along side improperly planned development can create fragmented habitat, the decline of prime farmlands and a number of other environmental issues which include air pollution, water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.

This problem, in my opinion, has evolved over time based on three significant factors: 1. the 1926 United States Department of Commerce Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA), 2. Government Subsidies, and 3. the social perception of the American Dream. The SZEA delegated the responsibility of land-use planning and zoning to local governments. At the time of delegation it was accepted as true that mixing land uses would negatively impact the health and safety of local residents. As such, the idea of exclusive zoning and separation of land-use was birthed, creating the signature development patterns of today’s urban sprawl. (Attkisson) Government subsidies have shaped the direction of this growth by way of supplying Federal tax deductions for home mortgages and freeway building. Deductions on home mortgages encourage inexpensive homes on cheap land; subsidies on freeway building have promoted road building and dispersed development over wider areas. Finally, social acuity propels the issue of sprawl. Fastened to the societal threads of national culture, sprawl is linked to the very idea of the American dream – the idea that everyone has the right to achieve a better, richer and happier life which includes home ownership. As such, a common social mindset substantiates the right to claim resources and available open space.

The variables to track over time, in order to illustrate the problem of urban sprawl and its imbalance with population growth, include population growth, amount of fragmented land and percent of newly consumed/developed land. The system in which this problem exists includes a collection of hard and soft elements. Hard elements in this system, or those able to be measured or quantified, may include:

* Acres of Developed Land
* Number of Developers
* Zoning Policies Encouraging Divided Land Use
* Non-Contiguous Community Development
* New Roads
* Air Pollution
* Water Pollution
* Acres of Open Space

Soft elements, or those elements not easily measure or quantified, may include:

* Demand for Single Family Houses
* Acceptance of High Density Housing
* Support of Land-use and Zoning Policy Revisions
* Desire for Home Ownership

Urban sprawl is highly dynamic, interdependent and largely complex. Compounding the issue is that academics and developers alike do not agree on a single explanation of what defines sprawl. Perhaps with a systems modeling approach, the complexities and evolving environmental issues of sprawl will become more clear enabling stakeholders to clearly define it, and ultimately begin a path of solving the problem.



References:

Attkisson, Lesley R. "Putting a Stop to Sprawl: State Intervention as a Tool for Growth Management." Vanderbilt Law Review (2009): 980-1015.


Cieslewicz, David J. "The Environmental Impacts of Sprawl." Editorial Advisory Board, The Urban Institute Press. Urban Sprawl - Causes, Consequences & Policy Responses. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press, 2002. 23-38.