Urban Sprawl

Environmental Economics Sp 08 | Mexico: Trade and the Environment | Recycling | Local Recycling Policies | Urban Sprawl | Trade and the Environment | Optimist Pessimist Debate | Forestry in China

Urban Sprawl

What is Sprawl?

The term sprawl was first introduced in 1937 by one of the first city planners in the southern United States, Earle Draperone. Sprawl is defined as the “tendency toward lower city densities as city footprints expand.” In more specific terms, the term urban sprawl as used in the pattern of land development in the United States as “spread-out” or “unlimited and noncontiguous way outward” with “one- or two-story single-family residential development on lots ranging from one-third to one acre (less on the West Coast) accompanied by strip commercial centers and industrial parks, also two stories or less in height and with a similar amount of land taking.”

Historical Perspective

Urban sprawl is most defined as the movement of people into the immediate area surrounding a city thereby increasing the area of the city. A more empirical definition used is the population density of a given area, which is open to even more interpretation as there are often differences between gradients. What began this dispersal out of the core of cities was the suburban movement, which enticed people to bring the city into the countryside.

The urban sprawl we know today began in mid 18th century London with the suburban movement. During this period of time civic technology was in its infant state, sanitation and safety concerns encouraged those who had money to move out of the city. Waste disposal was little more than open pits for garbage and cesspools for sewage, encouraging rodent populations and infecting the water supply with diseases such as cholera. Houses were made of wood and the roofs were thatched allowing the Fire of 1666 to raze most of the city. The presence of slums inside of the city raised issue of safety; no matter the police presence crimes were still perpetrated.

At first the more affluent denizens such as merchants or craftsmen would form enclaves inside of the city to provide a certain level of security and well being but it was the rural manors of nobles that then encouraged a “flight” from the city. Nobles who did not wish to live with lower classes had their primary residences in the country sides, when their presence was needed in the city for business they would take a carriage ride and stay in sequestered housing for only as long as needed. As the middle classes increased their wealth, they were then able to have the same style of life.

Description

As the largest influence on American culture, the suburban movement manifested itself with Philadelphia in force with the Main Line community. With the advent of the steam engine and its use in rail transportation urban sprawl became more feasible for lower incomes to escape from the cities. As a result entire towns developed along rail lines, allowing for commuting into the city to conduct business. Resultantly the infrastructure of cities then moved out to meet these new communities and provide the services one would have in a city. After World War Two in the United States especially, suburbanization took off with both support from civic planners and new wealth of the post war era and with citizens embracing automobile it has grown to the current state it is today. In 1790 only five percent of the entire population of the United States lived in areas termed “urban.” However, this figured tripled to fifteen percent by 1850 and continues to increase today. Figures from the 2000 Census documents almost eighty percent of all Americans indicating that they live in urban areas.

Description

The data demonstrates that central cities have a relatively stagnant growth rates in both population and land area. On the other hand, suburban areas have experienced a large increase in the rate of growth of both.

At the same time, the densities of the population in both central cities and suburban areas have displayed a steady drop elucidating to an expanding city footprint, or in other terms urban sprawl. Today, sprawl is an ever present phenomenon that occurs in not only the United States, but worldwide. Countries in Western and Eastern Europe, Latin American, as well as some parts of Asia all have experienced an increase in their cities’ footprints. Specifically, the United States experiences sprawl that is predominantly residential in form (low-density residential developments in rural and undeveloped areas).

Environmental Problems and Sprawl

Wetlands and Natural Areas: Land Use

As sprawl moves further away from the urban core, areas of natural land are lost at an alarming rate. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resource Inventory estimates that nearly 50 acres of United States’ farmland are being lost every hour of each day (Schmidt 2008). The environmental consequences are debatable.

Water Quality

Increased sprawl means an increase in the the amount of impervious surfaces covering the land. The EPA reported that 12-50% of all surface water pollution is an effect of urban runoff. With wide streets and large parking lot areas, low-density sprawl developments actually contribute more urban runoff per unit of area than compact urban environments (Schmidt 2008). Additionally, water filtration is prevented due to the impervious surfaces, reducing groundwater recharge and overall lowering the water table.

Global Warming

The United States is the largest contributor to CO2, the number one greenhouse gas that is known to cause global warming. The increase in vehicles miles traveled (VMT) have significantly contributed to the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere (Schmidt 1998). Sprawl increases the reliance on vehicle transportation. VMT is projected to increase by forty-eight percent between 2005 and 2030. Even with increase vehicle efficiency and low-carbon fuels, the impact of this increase will have negative effects (Bartholomew et al. 2008).

Decreased Air Quality

With sprawl comes an increased dependency for automobile use. According to the Highway Administration report Highway Statistics, total vehicle miles of travel have increased by 59% from 1980 to 1995, reflecting an increasing distance gap between jobs and housing (Schmidt 1998). In a report conducted by Mark Delucchi, an ecologist with the Institute of Transportation Standards at the University of California indicated that air pollutants are responsible for 20,000-40,000 annual cases of chronic respiratory illness. Vehicles are the main source of ground-level ozone, a critical air pollutant (Schmidt 1998).

Economic Forces and Urban Sprawl

The "monocentric city model" (Alonso, 1964; Muth, 1969; Mills, 1967) describes the basic urban structure as being a fundamental result of the trade-off between commuting costs and land rents per acre. This model, when in equilibrium, acknowledges that higher commuting costs (as you move farther away from the central business district (CBD)) result in lower land rents per acre which offset this increasing cost. As the rent decreases, the opportunity cost of purchasing more land declines and more individuals purchase larger plots of lands or houses, decreasing density levels. More specifically, this model can be analyzed as an individual or group commutes to their place of work, earning (y) income and incurring a commuting cost of (t) dollars. If then, they commute a total distance of (x) miles, total disposable income would be equivalent to y - t(x). Because commuting costs would necessarily increase as the distance from the CBD increases (as (x) increases so do total commuting costs), land rents per acre (r) must necessarily decrease. Due to this fact, people substitute away from non-housing goods (c) and toward larger land plots or bigger houses (q). However, the level of land consumption and average land rent per acre is also dependent on other variables. Commonly, these variables can be seen as written: r(x,y,t,u) and q(x,y,t,u) with (u) equating the common utility level enjoyed by city residents. This urban utility comes from two separate equilibrium conditions. (1) a city must fit its population and (2) urban residents must purchase land from farmers or at least outbid them for the land. When these two conditions are implemented and analyzed using within this model it can be seen that a city's footprint will increase in size as the population increases or as an individual's income increases. On the other hand, if the commuting cost or agricultural land rent increases the size of the city's footprint will fall.

Looking at the rapid population growth experienced in the United States, the increase in per captia GDP, and the technological innovations that have decreased commuting costs it can be seen that these features have caused massive expansion of cities throughout the USA resulting in many instances urban sprawl.

Market Failure and Urban Sprawl

It has been documented that there are three potential market failures that have been attributed to an increase in a city's footprint. These failures are considered externalities which are not internalized.

(1) TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND SPRAWL

Results indicate that the increase in traffic congestion as a result a city's increased spatial size costs on average almost 70 billion dollars a year, or approximately 520 extra dollars per person. Primarily, this loss of income is a result of the additional increase in time spent commuting and higher levels of fuel consumption. The increase in traffic congestion must also account for the addition levels of air pollution which come as a direct result of the increase in emissions due to the larger population of vehicles on the road as well as the increase in the distance spent commuting. Empirical analysis has shown that between 1970 and 2001, total miles traveled by passenger vehicles has increased from 920 billion miles to over 1.6 trillion miles per year.

HOWEVER, the link between sprawl and traffic congestion and the resulting pollution is somewhat unclear. If it is the case that edge cities are more prevalent in an area, the miles spent commuting could actually be diminishing or at least less than the national average as jobs become less centralized in the CBD and more sporadically placed. Similarly, the levels of air pollution in the United States has steadily declined since 1970, most likely due to the fact that technology improved the type of vehicles on the road and replaced the older, high pollution causing automobiles.

(2) FAILURE TO PLACE A SOCIAL VALUE ON OPEN SPACE

When land is purchased for its use in an urban setting, its value or price is dependent on the how productive this plot of land would be as an urban parcel (in other words, how much will the houses which are built on this land cost) relative to the value of the goods produced when this land was used for its previous purchase (predominantly agriculture) The price which accompanies these plots of land does not take in account the welfare that is gained from these relatively open plots of land. Because the market forces does not take in account this value that is placed on these open land areas, land is converted for an urban use more rapidly which leads to larger city footprints. Recently it has been found that open spaces within suburban areas are of greater importance than having open plots of land located near the fringe of the city footprint. Specifically, this value can be viewed in the substantially higher prices of housing units located near or in the close proximity of open space.

(3) FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE COST OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE

As a city increases its overall size, it must provide utilities and facilities to these developments that are further and further away from the center of the particular city. These new roads, sewers, schools, police stations, etc. are constructed and through a property tax system paid for by all homeowners within this city. Herein lies the problem: the cost paid by the individuals who will be using these infrastructures are less (typically) than the cost that they generate due to the fact that all individuals share in the total cost of these new infrastructures through their property taxes. When city officials use this to pay for these additions, they are necessarily using the average cost for the price of the additional infrastructure instead of equating at the efficient marginal cost. The reason this is particular situation leads to a market failure and larger cities is that because the homeowners in the new developments are not forced to pay the actual infrastructure cost and can pay a higher price for these houses. This in turns allows more land to be purchased and increases the size of the city.

Policies to Reduce Urban Sprawl

ECONOMIC POLICIES

Commuter Tax or a Congestion Tax

As mentioned above, one of the common features that have been attributed to Urban Sprawl is the decrease in the cost of commuting to work. When this cost is lowered, it lowers the incentives of living near your workplace and necessarily creates a tendency for people to live further away from the center of a city. In order to increase the cost that a person commuting to work would incur, the implementation of a tax or a toll may provide a feasible solution to this particular problem. When imposed this particular type of tax would internalize the congestion problem and force individuals to take in account their costs imposed on others. Practically, this type of toll may be enforced through a progressive taxation system not unlike the the Pennsylvania Turnpike, where as the distance traveled increases, the amount payed similarly increases.

Public Transportation

Another solution to this problem would be the creation of a more expansive public transportation system. Whether this includes busing, mono-rail trains, or subways, an increase in any or all of these areas would decrease not only the number of cars traveling the roadways, but also lower the overall level of emissions per person as they would be traveling in larger groups to their workplace. However, for this policy to be enacted, the infrastructure would have to be implemented. This would in turn require taxation of individuals who not only use this public transportation system, but would also have to be properly levied as you increase the distance from your place of work.

Problems

Although this type of tax may provide a potential solution to the problem associated with increased congestion, they might impose a segregation problem within this metropolitan area. Lower income families might be forced to live within a certain distance of the city center and would be unable to move into suburban areas. Similarly, a mass transit system create expansion along the rail lines or bus routes and also has the tendency, in some cases, for the poor to locate themselves along these routes further increasing segregation.

Impact Tax

A land impact tax involves internalizing the social cost involved in providing the public infrastructure along the urban fringe and also taking in account the social cost of transforming otherwise open land into urban development areas. A tax of this nature would have to incorporate this costs in either the price of the land, or in the housing that is built, or even in the taxes paid per year on the property owned.

Problems

The problems associated with a tax of this nature are similar to the problems that accompany commuter taxes. Primarily, one of the biggest concerns is the segregation that would come as a result of increasing land costs as you move further away from central city areas. This would create a disparity in income distributions, as poorer families would be unable to move into suburban areas and only the wealthiest families would like near the outskirts of a city.

DEVELOPMENTAL POLICIES

Smart Growth

Description

Smart Growth focuses on the idea of creating cities which grow at a slow rate to accommodate a growing population base, while keeping population densities high within the entirety of the city. Several key components of Smart Growth include:

Revitalizing communities by directing public investment toward areas where the infrastructure to support development is already in place or planned.

Creating walkable neighborhoods by locating housing, shopping, schools, and offices in closer proximity to each other and providing sidewalks and attractive streetscapes.

Offering a choice in transportation modes, whether by foot, car, bike, bus, or train.Involving citizens in deciding how and where their community should grow.

Fostering distinctive, attractive communities with a unique sense of place.

Providing housing for people of all income levels in close proximity to jobs and activities.

Preserving open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas.

Saving taxpayers the unnecessary cost of building the infrastructure required to support spread-out development.

Primarily, Smart Growth incorporates many different policies such as growth management and land acquisition.

Growth Management

The concept of growth management focuses on requiring various cities to contain urban sprawl by drawing boundaries around cities. Similarly, these acts require that comprehensive land use planning at both the local and metropolitan levels be strictly enforced and enacted. Since the 1970's 12 states have instituted growth management or planning reforms. These states include Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.

Land Acquisition

These type of reforms deal primarily with preserving open space or acquiring parks and wildlife habitats within or around a specific city. These policies may include purchasing farmland or paying farmers with subsidies to prevent them from selling their land for urban use.

A "Green" Example

Today, we are beginning to see new support for smart growth within cities. In fact, an award has been given out for the town, suburb, or city which distinguishes itself as being the leading and most effective area in the United States in instituting and implementing policies to combat urban sprawl and improve city life. In 2006 this award was given to metropolitan suburb in Vermont, Winooski.

However, this recent trend has been viewed nationwide. Smart growth strategies have been used to help reach various environmental goals. From the list below, people are beginning to see urban sprawl as having immediate and detrimental impact on their way of life.

:The Rosslyn-Ballston Metro corridor, in Arlington, Virginia, places dense, mixed-use infill development at five Metro stations. The transit success and corresponding environmental performance are impressive. Nearly 50 percent of corridor residents use transit to commute, contributing to significant reductions in emissions from single occupancy vehicles. Development within the Rosslyn-Ballston Metro corridor occupies roughly two square miles. Replicating this development at typical suburban densities could consume over 14 square miles of open space.

The city of Orlando transformed the 1,125-acre Naval Training Center into Baldwin Park, a vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood. Before construction began, painstaking care was taken to recycle everything that was salvageable. For example, 256 buildings, 200 miles of underground utilities, and 25 miles of roads were dismantled, yielding 600,000 tons of concrete, 80,000 tons of asphalt, and 240,000 tons of limerock. The community created 16 extra acres of parkland by using innovative underground stormwater management systems. As an infill redevelopment project, Baldwin Park takes advantage of existing infrastructure and puts people close to transit options.

The town of Davidson, North Carolina, is setting the standard for creating healthy and livable neighborhoods. Davidson uses pedestrian, bicycle, and street circulation plans for all new development. Streets are designed to make it easy for town residents to walk and bicycle. The town's narrow, tree-lined streets have on-street parking and sidewalks on both sides of the road. This attractive environment makes it more pleasant and convenient for people to walk or bicycle instead of driving, which in turn can reduce air pollution.

References

Massey, Douglas S. and Nancy A. Denton. "Suburbanization and Segregation in U.S. Metropolitan Areas." American Journal of Sociology Vol. 94, (1988): 592-626.

McDonogh, Gary W. "Suburban Place, Mythic Thinking, and the Transformations of Global Cities." Urban Anthropology 35, no. 4 (2006): 471-501.

Thorns, D. C. "Suburban Values and the Urban System." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 16, no. 1/2 (1975): 100-113.

I'm using Chicago 15th Edition for the references -Andrew

Nechyba, Thomas J. and Randall P. Walsh."Urban Sprawl,"The Journal of Economic Perspectives 18, No. 4 (Autumn 2004): 77-200. http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0895-3309(200423)18%3A4%3C177%3AUS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23&cookieSet=1)

Downs, Anthony. "Some Realities About Sprawl and Urban Decline,"Housing Policy Debate 10, No. 4 (1999): 955-974. http://www.fanniemaefoundation.org/programs/hpd/pdf/hpd_1004_downs.pdf

Brueckner, Jan K. "Urban Sprawl: Lessons from Urban Economics,"Brookings-Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs (2001):1-33 http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/brookings-wharton_papers_on_urban_affairs/v2001/2001.1brueckner02.pdf

Brueckner, Jan K. "Urban Sprawl: Diagnosis and Remedies," International Regional Science Review 23, No. 2 (2000): 160-171. http://irx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/23/2/160

Bartholomew, Keith, Don Chen, Reid Ewing, Jerry Walters, and Steve Winkelman. Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2008.

Schmidt , Charles. "The Specter of Sprawl." Environmental Health Perspectives 106.6 (1998): A274-A279.