The Problem with Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl refers to the pattern of outward-expanding, low-density development that characterizes many urban areas and creates car dependencies and energy inefficiencies that contribute to global warming and harm the environment. Largely considered to be an American phenomenon, sprawl is present in cities on a global scale and is the result of unsustainable city planning techniques.
Single-family homes and personal vehicles became more prevalent in the United States during the economic prosperity after World War II (Rafferty). Public works projects, like the Interstate Highway System, increased accessibility to areas further away from urban centers (Rafferty). Populations expanded from urban centers as more and more people moved to detached dwellings in the suburbs as an escape to nature from the crowded, busy city. A growing suburban population called for more outward development, and as individual cars became more common, people were still able to access the city center despite the growing distance (Rafferty). Infrastructures like roads, parking lots, and driveways encouraged people to adopt the use of personal vehicles (Mattioli et al. 5).
Access to an automobile has become a near-necessity for many people living in suburban areas. Cities’ public transportation routes often don’t extend to every suburban neighborhood, forcing residents to use an individual vehicle to access food, healthcare, education, and employment. This dependency ties well-being with energy consumption (Mattioli et al. 1). Someone who is aware of the negative environmental impact of solely using personal vehicles may have no choice but to contribute to the problem in order to meet their basic needs. Low-density development is less energy efficient due to larger, single-family homes that each require heating, cooling, and electricity (Rafferty). This energy has to come from somewhere, and in 2019, 80% of energy consumption in the United States was from fossil fuels (Sanchez). As urban sprawl contributes to global warming, global warming has begun to create additional problems surrounding the issue of sprawl. In places like San Diego, master-planned neighborhoods are built in places seriously threatened by wildfires, which are made more frequent by climate change (Herzog). The patterns of horizontal development are so indoctrinated into city planning that developers consider expanding into disaster-prone areas before considering building vertically on safer, already-developed land.
New development doesn’t happen overnight, and the gradual crawl of sprawl can make it difficult to recognize it as an issue, especially for those who haven’t been in an area long enough to notice changes. But aerial photos of previous undeveloped or underdeveloped areas less than a decade later clearly illustrate the impact of sprawl on a landscape.
These photos were included in an interactive article published by the New York Times to demonstrate the way urban sprawl has transformed the American landscape within a relatively short period of time. These photos also highlight one of the reasons why urban sprawl can be a difficult problem to solve. Once the concrete has dried and these previously natural areas are developed, it is very difficult to get them back to their original state. Once people are living in these areas and have established their lives and livelihoods in these developments, it is incredibly difficult to turn back the clock. Addressing urban sprawl requires policies that work towards changing how cities are developed and planned and how people live and travel within their community. Some policy proposals to control further urban sprawl are taxes and toll gates that discourage personal vehicle usage, boundary limits on cities that promote vertical development, and investments in abandoned or underutilized areas to better use already-developed land (Habibi and Asadi 139). Some cities are beginning to redevelop parking lots as apartments or office buildings, creating more compact neighborhoods and reducing incentives to drive a car downtown (Badger and Bui). Policies that invest in making public transit systems more accessible and appealing to residents have been implemented in some cities. For example, some cities have implemented rapid bus transit systems which make of use the existing infrastructure to support mass transit instead of personal vehicle use (Lerner).
One group that has a major stake in the issue of urban sprawl is developers, architects, and city planners. People who are in the business of continued urban development should be concerned about how current city planning techniques and policies impact the environment. Urban sprawl is not an issue that can easily be addressed on the individual level for most people, but people in this group have the potential to change the current system of city planning and advocate for more compact, energy-efficient development. People in this business have a stake in adapting to more sustainable practices in city planning because change will likely be inevitable due to a finite amount of land to develop and sprawl across. It’s in the best interest of developers, architects, and city planners to make the necessary changes sooner rather than later. Another stakeholder in this issue is the daily commuter. Sprawl is responsible for farther commutes and therefore longer commute times. Residents of suburban neighborhoods who work in the city center are affected by sprawl every day as they must spend hours in their cars every week just to make a living. Mixed-use zoning would allow more people to live close to their place of employment, reducing commute times and the overall carbon footprint of each individual. Another group of stakeholders is wildlife activists. Horizontal development destroys the habitats of wildlife in order to make room for human habitation. In addition to creating conditions that increase carbon emissions, sprawl eliminates the natural systems that serve as carbon banks and threatens the habitats of species living close to metropolitan areas. Wildlife activists have a stake in urban sprawl because they care about the well-being of wildlife and the preservation of natural habitats, and they would likely be interested in knowing more about the history behind sprawl and what policies can be implemented to control it.
Developers, architects, and city planners have much more experience than I do in the practical aspects of what it takes to address and control urban sprawl. My knowledge on the subject of city planning has come from research rather than personal experience. This group of stakeholders may not be entirely receptive to an argument from me, since I don’t have professional insight on the issue. However, I do have a personal connection to the issue because I have always lived in the suburbs and existed in the sprawl. I have been a consumer of the product this group is putting out: suburban development. My opinion on this matter is credible to this group of stakeholders because I know firsthand if their product is no longer meeting my needs. In high school, it could take me an hour to drive home after school, so my need as a student to maximize my time was not met. This experience gives me credibility when addressing the second group of stakeholders, commuters. As much as I enjoy driving, I found no joy in living so far removed from school, shops, and restaurants. Now that I live in West Campus and am walking distance from most places that I need to go to on a regular basis, I have the experience and knowledge to assert that mixed-use zoning is more convenient and efficient than single-use zoning. I can relate to commuters’ frustration, so they will likely be receptive to an argument from me because I can speak from similar experiences. While I don’t have personal experience in habitat preservation or wildlife welfare work, I think wildlife activists would be receptive to my argument as long as I reference credible sources that provide accurate information regarding the issue of wildlife habitat endangerment. These activists likely put a lot of effort into spreading awareness and information about their specific issue. In a way, my argument regarding urban sprawl will be contributing to this effort, so they will likely respect it as long as I accurately portray how wildlife is affected by horizontal development.
The following video provides a visually-appealing and succinct explanation of the environmental benefits of compact cities. You can use the hyperlink in the caption to access it.
Works Cited:
Badger, Emily, and Quoctrung Bui. “A Decade of Urban Transformation, Seen from Above.” The New York Times, Dec. 27, 2019, nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/27/upshot/america-from-above.html
Habibi, Sara, and Naser Asadi. “Causes, results and methods of controlling urban sprawl.” Procedia Engineering, vol. 21, 2011, pp. 133–141, doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.1996
Herzog, Lawrence. “Opinion: Vote ‘Yes’ on A Because Master-Planned Sprawl is No Longer Viable.” Times of San Diego, 26 Feb. 2020, timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2020/02/26/opinion-vote-yes-on-a-because-master-planned-sprawl-is-no-longer-viable/
Lerner, Jaime. “How to Build a Sustainable City.” The New York Times, 7 Dec. 2015, nytimes.com/2015/12/07/opinion/how-to-build-a-sustainable-city.html
Mattioli, Giulio, et al. “The political economy of car dependence: A systems of provision approach.” Energy Research and Social Science, vol. 66, Aug. 2020, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101486
Rafferty, John. “The Problem of Urban Sprawl.” Encyclopedia Britannica, britannica.com/explore/savingearth/urban-sprawl
Sanchez, Bill. “Fossil fuels account for the largest share of U.S. energy production and consumption.” Energy Information Administration, 14 Sept. 2020, eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45096#:~:text=As%20a%20result%2C%20fossil%20fuels,production%20in%20the%20past%20decade.&text=Most%20U.S.%20energy%20trade%20is,of%20energy%20imports%20in%202019
