asap

Chapter 2Chapter 2 Suburbs and

Suburban Sprawl

Community Redeveloped 2-1

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Low-density development in a foothills suburb west of Denver, Colorado. S. Buntin.

There is no more important community design problem than the redesign and adaptation of the American suburb--the symbol and logos of

American affluence and technology and growth in the past forty years. -- Sim Van der Ryn1

In the United States, more than one million acres of farmland land area. These are just some of the legacies of suburbanization

are lost annually to development. Between 1969 and 1983, since World War II.2

population in the U.S. grew 16 percent, while vehicle miles traveled Suburban communities demand careful evaluation because

grew 56 percent. Between 1970 and 1990, the Los Angeles many are unsustainable--they use resources without a mechanism for3

metropolitan area grew 45 percent in population, but 300 percent in adequately replenishing them; they are low-density in nature,

4

replacing wilderness with grass lawns, farmland with strip malls; they

give priority to the automobile over the pedestrian; they lack

economic and cultural diversity; and the list goes on. But to say that

many suburbs are unsustainable is not enough. What is unsustainable

about them? How did they get that way? What are the economic,

environmental, and social costs associated with a sprawl existence?

Why Focus on Suburban Communities?

Suburban communities warrant focus not because they are

suburbs per se, but because of their common postwar development

patterns. While central cities are generally high-density and often

based on a grid street pattern, and rural areas are very low density

and preserve--whether intended or not--agricultural and natural open

space, suburbs are often neither city nor country. And they are

Community Redeveloped 2-2

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

The Denver Post.

generally not a happy medium somewhere in between. Rather, central city decreases occurred from 1950 to 1990 in Cleveland;

postwar suburbs especially are low-density settlements comprised of Syracuse; Louisville, Kentucky; and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Why are these statistics important? As later sections will

parks, and relatively large-lot residential subdivisions, predominantly

automobile-based.

Perhaps suburban trends would not be so significant if

suburbia wasn’t home to so many people. Today, over half of

America’s population lives in suburban settings. Moreover,5

suburban populations and geographic boundaries in many

metropolitan areas are growing at an alarming rate, especially in the

Western U.S. Here, thirteen states make up the most urbanized

region in America. The Seattle metropolitan area, for example, has6

grown from just over one million people in 1950, to nearly

three million in 1995. In that same time span, the Phoenix7

metropolitan area surged from 350,000 people to 2.5 million. And8

the growth does not appear to be slowing, at least not on the

suburban fringe.

In fact, many metropolitan areas have grown precisely at the

expense of the central city. In Detroit, the metropolitan population show, most suburban growth is unsustainable: it does not provide for

increased from 3,246,000 in 1950 to 4,382,000 in 1990, but the City the equitable preservation of the built and natural environments,

of Detroit itself decreased from 1,850,000 to 1,028,000 in that same cultural heritages, and economic opportunities. While many residents

time span. Similar proportions of metropolitan area increases with moved out of the central cities to avoid congestion, find better9

10

commercial strip and enclosed mall retail centers, landscaped office

Community Redeveloped 2-3

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

A typical suburban land use pattern: arterial street bounded by strip retail and residential subdivisions with curvilinear street patterns. S. Buntin.

schools, feel safer, and purchase single-family homes, they also

encouraged pollution, destroyed natural habitat, increased traffic

congestion, and directly and indirectly contributed to a host of other

ills.

The fact that suburban areas are so large and growing so

rapidly, imposing a variety of adverse affects on society and the built

and natural environments, demands that suburban development be

reevaluated. Further, it demands that many core suburban areas be

redeveloped with sustainability in mind--and in action. Unsustainable

land use activities must be stopped and then reversed precisely at the

locations where they are most prevalent.

While suburbs come in all shapes and sizes, they are also

distinguished from other communities because of their relationship to

larger, and usually older, central cities; and because of their

interrelationships (acknowledged or not) between other suburbs of only be found ultimately in the context of regional sustainability.

those same central cities. Such geographically, economically, and Individual efforts must go hand-in-hand with regional collaboration.

even politically linked cities directly affect their metropolitan Postwar suburban areas are largely unsustainable for two

neighbors through land use and other decisions. Being a suburb, or reasons. First, they are based on sprawl, and have numerous costs

part of a suburban setting, means being a member of a metropolitan associated with that orientation. This will be discussed in detail in the

region. And sustainability of the suburb or related community can next section. Second, they are based on an entrenched vision of the

“American Dream,” which itself leads to sprawl.

Community Redeveloped 2-4

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Denver metro area, 1990 (dark) to 2020 (light). Denver Regional Council of Governments.

Denver, Colorado: An Example of Unconstrained Suburban Growth

“Smart growth,” says Colorado Governor Roy Romer, “is about developing visions for the future of communities, regions and the state and developing strategies to accomplish these visions.” And the11

challenge is certainly real, especially in the Metropolitan Denver region. But Denver’s growth--while perhaps economically strategic for developers--has been anything but strategic for the entire region. Huge master planned communities like Highlands Ranch to the south and Rock Creek to the northwest contribute to residential sprawl, quickly replacing what was once agricultural land and high plains brush with house after identical house, Kentucky bluegrass lawns, and overly wide streets that mandate use of the automobile. Smaller, piecemeal residential developments do the same, and large business parks and “big box” retail round off the threesome of contemporary suburban development.

The Denver Regional Council of Governments estimates that another 750,000 people will move into the metro area by the year 2020. That would bring the12

population to 2,800,000, up from just 1,000,000 in 1960. Such population growth is almost expected given13

Denver’s proximity to the mountains, the new Denver International Airport, the temperate climate, and a renewed Lower Downtown. The “hows” and “wheres” of that growth are cause for the greatest concern.

DRCOG, in its Metro Vision 2020 framework, has identified four possible alternatives for future development: compact, corridor, satellite, and dispersed. Dispersed development is growth under14

current local and regional trends and policies. In this scenario, low-density residential development continues on the edges of existing suburban areas, adding an

additional 350 square miles of urban area to the existing 530, which itself is up from 300 in 1970. Yet if the15

metro area cities and counties were to actually build out their current comprehensive plans for growth, the urbanized area would swell to 1,150 square miles, an area larger than the cities of Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, and Long Beach, California, combined.16

By 2020, metro area dispersed growth would look like this:

The Metro Vision 2020 plan hopes to effectively manage such sprawling development through regional

collaboration, but the future is uncertain. Suburban growth in select Denver suburbs, 1950-1990:17

Aurora 1950 - 11,421 1970 - 74,974 1990 - 222,110 Boulder 1950 - 19,999 1970 - 66,870 1990 - 83,312 Broomfield 1950 - 176 1970 - 7,621 1990 - 24,636 Castle Rock 1950 - 741 1970 - 1,531 1990 - 8,708 Golden 1950 - 5,238 1970 - 9,817 1990 - 12,363 Lakewood 1950 - 3,932 1970 - 92,787 1990 - 126,481 Westminster 1950 - 2,322 1970 - 19,432

Community Redeveloped 2-5

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

A pre-World War II Denver suburb’s street is pedestrian-oriented and walkable. S. Buntin.

A post-World War II Denver suburb’s street is auto-oriented and uninviting to pedestrians. S. Buntin.

According to Anthony Downs, author of New Visions for Combined, these add to a society which promotes

Metropolitan America, this vision is based on five elements: “unconstrained individualism,” yet ironically a lack of diversity in18

C Ownership of detached single-family homes on spacious lots

C Ownership of automotive vehicles

C Working in low-rise workplaces--offices or industrial buildings or shopping centers--in attractively landscaped parklike settings

C Residence in small communities with strong local governments

C An environment free from the signs of poverty

19

the built suburban form. They also add to economic, environmental,

and social costs that can be devastating to the community and its

region.

Kenneth T. Jackson, in Grabgrass Frontier, similarly

identifies five characteristics of postwar suburbs: peripheral

locations, low density, architectural similarity in housing, available

and affordable housing, and economical and racial homogeneity. 20

Community Redeveloped 2-6

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

It is worth asking whether the vision of the American Dream growth has been unplanned, ineffectively planned, or uncontrollable.

promotes the characteristics, or whether the characteristics promote The case studies reviewed later demonstrate that suburbs can be far

the American Dream. Undoubtedly, they are inextricably linked: more sustainable than they are today.

single-family homes on spacious lots and low-rise workplaces in Sprawl can be difficult to define because it takes many shapes

attractively landscaped parking settings are built in peripheral over many periods of time. Still, it is easy to identify. It may include

locations and at low densities. Available and affordable housing that street after curvilinear street of non-unique, non-localized housing;

is architecturally similar results in ownership, while the large-scale miles of single-story strip malls surrounded by vast parking lots; or

desire for ownership at an affordable price dictates peripheral clusters of low-story office and industrial buildings on the edge of

locations and similarity in architectural styles. The desire for town--most accessible only by automobile.

residence in small communities with strong local governments

manifests itself in peripheral locations at low densities, converting

one-time small towns to suburbs on the periphery of metropolitan

areas. Economical and racial homogeneity stem from the vision of an

environment free from the signs of poverty. Yet as economical and

racial segregation continue, the vision appears to be more firmly

entrenched.

Suburban Sprawl

Sprawl is the manifestation of unchecked suburban growth. developments follow, and so do people.

It is, in many ways, the antithesis of sustainable suburbanization, for But sprawl also occurs because transportation access has

eventually it places too large a burden on the natural, economic, and enabled it to. Even in late 19th Century cities, streetcar lines went

cultural environments. And while “sustainable suburbanization” may beyond the city center and into adjacent land deemed ripe for

seem like an oxymoron, it is so only because so much suburban residential--at least upper-class residential--development.

The Causes of Sprawl

As a process, sprawl is based fundamentally on land

development--converting agricultural, natural, or otherwise “vacant”

land to other uses, often residential. As values rise in a city’s central

business district, the incentive for a commercial enterprise to remain

is low because the value of land just outside the city is significantly

less. As businesses move to the periphery of urban areas to take21

advantage of low costs, residential subdivisions and other real estate

22

Community Redeveloped 2-7

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Suburban tract housing encroaches upon prime agricultural land in California. J. Clark, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Commercial facilities and services to meet the needs of new

residences logically followed, as they do today thanks in part to

federally and state subsidized highways. In fact, residential

“bedroom” communities are the suburb types which have pioneered

the most remote corners of metropolitan regions, especially in the

1970s and 1980s.23

American urban development has not always taken the shape

of sprawl, however. While all metropolitan areas have grown, it was

not until after World War II that suburbanization as we know it today

took hold. Prior to the war, many Americans lived in small towns

and villages, either far from or fairly close to larger cities. America

was still largely rural. But at the end of the war, a number of factors

rapidly changed development patterns.

First, jobs were readily available in factories that had been housing itself was promulgated in part by architects who developed

expanded to supply the war effort, and these factories were located single-family house plan books; and by developers who constructed

in central cities. Residents from farms and small towns moved to new subdivisions. Additionally, family magazines such as Ladies’24

the cities to fill the jobs, and they needed housing. Low-density Home Journal promoted a “suburban” life style in which each new

peripheral housing provided proximity to the city without actually family had the opportunity to live in a quiet neighborhood, plant a

being in the “hustle and the bustle” of the city. garden reminiscent of the country, and still commute easily to the city

Second, high marriage and birth rates after soldiers returned for work.

home increased the need for housing. The desire for single-family

25

Community Redeveloped 2-8

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

The Denver Post.

The iconography of suburbia. P. Katz.

Third, the federal government, through the Federal Housing suburban settings

Administration, approved billions of dollars worth of mortgage today.

insurance for new tract housing on the outskirts of cities. Fourth, the26

Moreover, the FHA not only underwrote mortgage loans, but it mortgage interest

dictated neighborhood design through the issuance of “standards” deduction allowed on

which maximized lending security. These designs advocated large federal income taxes27

yards; curving streets without grids and without through access; and has greatly promoted

segregated land uses, keeping industrial from commercial from the opportunity for the

residential. Because builders were eager for business--more than 33 “average” family to

percent of the mortgages were backed by FHA at the time--they own a home. With the

accepted the deduction, home-

standards, which owners can actually make less money and yet qualify for a higher

became the basis priced home because, over a year, the money that would go to taxes

f o r national instead goes to pay for the home. The majority of those homes have

building and been single-family, relatively large lot, on the periphery of cities in

engineering codes which the owners generally work.

e v i d e n t i n Fifth, federal and state governments invested heavily

in highways and streets, most notably through the 1956 Interstate

Highway Act which provided for a 42,500-mile interstate system of

which 90 percent was paid by the federal government. New roads28

enabled families to move to newly created subdivisions, next door or

in the next state. Additionally, private transportation received ample

Community Redeveloped 2-9

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

taxpayer subsidies because it was considered a “public good,” while The current rate of suburban growth appears that it cannot be

mass transit alternatives such as streetcars were forced to pay their sustained, especially from an environmental perspective. The report

own way. Ultimately, suburbanites came to depend on the finds that rapid suburban growth has increased even in the last

automobile, which in turn required more and more infrastructure. decade, raising two questions: How, and why? 29

Finally, technology and economies of scale allowed If growth has occurred despite these costs, what has enabled

builders to create huge new subdivisions in a fraction of the time and it continued? There are three main factors. First, many of the costs

cost it took before the war. Developers such as the father and son have either been ignored or are unknown. In many economic models,

team of Abraham, William, and Alfred Levitt could now build for example, societal costs that include depletion of resources and air

affordable homes away from larger cities, as they did with Levittown pollution are not adequately assessed against the product or process

on former potato fields on New York’s Long Island. In a that causes the environmental damage. Without the higher cost,

construction process divided into 27 distinct steps, the Levitts built consumers are less likely to understand that the additional costs even

up to 36 homes a day, eventually constructing 17,400 single-family exist. The costs are not paid by the responsible party and fall to

homes for a population of 82,000 residents in the late 1940s and early society at large, though society is not fully aware.

1950s. Second, the mechanisms in favor of sprawl-oriented30

A report released in 1996 and sponsored by the Bank of development are large and not easily steered in other directions.

America, California Resources Agency, Greenbelt Alliance, and The Moreover, initial costs of residential development, for example, are

Low Income Housing Fund analyzes growth patterns in California relatively low and they do provide opportunities for families to own

and finds that while suburban sprawl has both helped to fuel homes. The combination of large industries oriented toward low-

California’s “unparalleled economic and population boom, and that density development, and people who are willing to buy into such

it has enabled millions of Californians to realize the enduring dream development because it is convenient and initially inexpensive and

of home ownership,” it has also created a full menu of significant provides lots of personal space, has much momentum.

costs which the state and its citizens “can no longer afford.” And third, American society has become accustomed to a31

Community Redeveloped 2-10

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

A “typical” suburban strip commercial center. S. Buntin.

seemingly limitless ability to expand. This “pioneering” mentality--

based on the vision of the American Dream discussed earlier--often

results in development that is land-consuming “by right.”

Fundamentally, many Americans want large yards and wide-open

spaces, and believe it is within their rights to have it. While some

Americans are moving back into cities and older suburbs, the urge to

move away from urban centers and people and farther into the

frontier is strong, perhaps even innate. Yet when everyone pushes

on, no one really “escapes” for long.

There are also several factors for why sprawl development

continues.32

The decentralization of employment centers has led to new

development on the periphery of metropolitan areas. While central into the once-pristine foothills.

cities were the predominant employment centers for many years, they Americans have become increasingly dependent on the

are now challenged by “edge cities” like Denver’s Tech Center. automobile for commuting to work, going on shopping trips, taking

New subdivisions--predominantly housing--have pushed children to school and recreational activities, and for other reasons.

further and further into agricultural and environmentally sensitive In the metropolitan Denver area, for example, vehicle miles traveled

areas, seemingly without end. In Golden, Colorado, for example, increased from 15 million miles per weekday in 1970 to 45 million in

new single- and multifamily housing tracts climb higher and higher 1995. At current trend levels, VMTs will be at 73 million in 2020.33

Many older communities, including central cities and first-ring

suburbs, have become isolated. Middle-class mobility in housing and

employment, as well as via the automobile, has allowed residents to

Community Redeveloped 2-11

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Issaquah, Washington, 1961... Redevelopment for Livable Communities.

... and 1995. Redevelopment for Livable Communities.

live closer to recreation which may mean living farther from work. from additional regulation are

Alternatively, they live closer to work, which is now in newer guaranteed by suburbs trying to

suburbs. Either way, older neighborhoods have become abandoned,

leading to disrupted social stability, increased economic disparity

between older communities and newer suburbs, and inaccessibility of

jobs to the poor and working class residents.

There is a general perception that new suburbs are safer and

more desirable than existing communities, with special emphasis

placed on streets, schools, and a “small town” atmosphere. “Fear of

crime is a great motivator for development,” says Joe Verdoorn, a develop a strong business base. Similarly, many businesses feel

Phoenix planner. “Everybody wants to be on the far side of the suburban residents are better educated, leading to a more effective

freeway.” workforce.34

Land is often less expensive on the metropolitan fringe. Technological changes have allowed employment centers to

People move where housing costs are seemingly less expensive, and decentralize. The age of the telecommunication “super-highway,” via

starter homes especially are still within the financial reach of a typical the Internet, may facilitate this trend.

family, at least initially. Highway and automobile subsidies by federal and state

There is a belief that suburban communities give businesses governments, discussed previously, ensure that development is

more flexibility to grow, especially as tax incentives and freedom dispersed and automobile-based. While individuals are responsible

for paying direct costs associated with owning automobiles--such as

the vehicle itself, gasoline, insurance, and perhaps parking--they often

do not pay the true costs laid upon society as a whole, including air

pollution, traffic congestion, road damage, and expansion of

Community Redeveloped 2-12

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Sprawl leads directly to air pollution: Denver’s infamous “brown cloud.” S. Buntin.

infrastructure. communities are forced to accommodate shopping malls and other

Local land use policies, promulgated either by segregated retail structures.

zoning districts or no- or slow-growth practices, ensure that uses are “We were losing all our sales tax dollars to these big regional

separated from each other, and that new development is on the malls,” said Steven Boand, former mayor of Castle Rock--a suburb

periphery of a city. A limit on the number of residential building south of Denver. “To compensate, we were forced to let a big outlet

permits in the City of Boulder, Colorado, for instance, has mall come in here. We were roundly criticized for that, but our town

inadvertently resulted in residential sprawl just outside of Boulder’s was teetering on the verge of bankruptcy.”

surrounding open space buffer, where adjacent cities have not

adopted similar measures.

In a number of communities, fiscal incentives have allowed

local governments either to pick among land uses based on tax

considerations, or not to recover the true costs of development

through taxes. Accommodating affordable housing will not provide

high tax revenues and is not given other fiscal incentives, for

example, so is overlooked. However, strip-style retail does and is

thus given priority. In Utah a law was passed which stipulated that

as property values rise, the overall tax rate of a given area must fall;

this then is coupled with language that limits the amount local

governments can charge developers for new services, including roads

and sewers. Similarly, the Colorado tax structure indirectly35

promotes sprawl because local governments cannot raise property

taxes beyond a certain ceiling. In order to raise revenue, then, these

36

The Costs of Sprawl

Community Redeveloped 2-13

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Office park development halfway between Boulder and Denver is not ecologically integrated into the site and ruins the view of the mountains. S. Buntin.

Suburban sprawl is expensive. While it may appear to be less

expensive for businesses moving to new greenfield sites, for

developers to build on undeveloped land on a city’s periphery, or for

a family to buy a new home in a new subdivision--at least initially--

sprawl is certainly costly to society as a whole. These costs fall into

six general categories: costs to taxpayers, costs to business, costs to

residents of new suburbs, costs to residents of central cities and older

suburbs, costs to farmers, and costs to the environment.37

Costs to Taxpayers

The major cost to taxpayers is of increased infrastructure

needed to support new growth. In Ventura County, California, for

example, it is estimated that over the next eight years, the county will

need to spend $1.35 billion to widen roads and build interchanges to

maintain and slightly improve the current level of service. The cost38

would be much lower, but the county continues to grow as sprawl

encroaches from Los Angeles. In the 1980s, the Minneapolis-St.

Paul metropolitan area spent over $1 billion adding capacity to its

roadway system; 85 percent of that, however, was spent on its most

affluent suburbs in the southwestern part of the metro area.39

According to a report released recently by the U.S. Office of

Technology Assistance, low-density suburban development costs on

average 25 percent more for roads, 15 percent more for utilities, and

five percent more for schools than do planned higher-density

developments.40

Recent research also demonstrates the differences in cost per

single-family dwelling unit between San Francisco-area suburban and

urban infill housing. Streets and roads in suburbs cost $3,000 per41

unit, while for infill sites cost $800. Utility extensions cost $5,000 in

suburbs, but only $950 for infill. While the average suburban

Community Redeveloped 2-14

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Moving outward from a dated or inconvenient core is the easiest individual solution and provides what consumers seek in most marketplaces. The larger societal costs or impacts of these development patterns are not considered when the firm’s or individual’s choices are made.

Robert W. Burchell Understanding Sprawl45

household uses 400 gallons of water per day, the average infill and thirty times greater than the suburban average. Taxpayers

household uses only 200. Similarly, while a suburban house uses 150 across the metropolitan region, however, pay for efforts to decrease

therms of natural gas, an infill house uses only 60 therms. And the crime--either directly through taxes or personal income for

finally, a suburban house uses on average about 10,000 kilowatthours protection services, or indirectly through fear.

of electricity per year, while an infill house uses only 6,000 kWh per

year.

But there are other costs to taxpayers, as well. They pay the

costs of attempting to solve environmental problems associated with

development of virgin land on the metropolitan fringe. Large,

government-funded task groups, for example, may be necessary to

tackle regional issues such as air pollution and water quality directly

resulting from sprawl.

There are also costs associated with dealing with social

problems that develop in the central city and older neighborhoods

when they become neglected or abandoned as a result of development

on the periphery. As older neighborhoods are left behind by middle-

income residents for newer suburban sites, for instance, the poverty

level rises and crime intensifies in these areas. In fact, as

concentrations of poverty increase beyond ten percent in a

neighborhood, violent crime rates appear to increase exponentially.42

Violent crime rates in Minneapolis’s poorest neighborhoods between

1987 and 1989 were ten times greater than the metropolitan average,

43

Costs to Business

Sprawl is costly to business,

as well. Because it reduces the

quality of life in a community,

businesses often move away from

or bypass communities with high

traffic congestion, high housing

costs, and other negative

consequences of sprawl when

relocating. Additionally, the effects

of sprawl can cause taxes and

development costs to rise

throughout the metropolitan area,

resulting in a regional rise in the

costs of both residing in the area

and doing business. These costs44

are a large reason that many companies are choosing to move out of

California, for instance, and into neighboring states like Nevada,

Community Redeveloped 2-15

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Once concentration of poverty, disinvestment, middle-class flight, and sprawl occur, they become more costly and detrimental than any other set of problems facing American society today.

Myron Orfield Metropolitics: Social and Economic Polarization Vs. Community and Stability48

Utah, and Arizona. $900 per employee. Spatial mismatches tend to result in higher

Businesses can also be asked to foot a large portion of the bill labor costs and reduced worker productivity.

to help pay for sprawl’s consequences. For example, businesses in Abandoned investments in older neighborhoods may also

metro Denver often pay for carpooling and mass transit programs for result as the neighborhoods themselves face decline. Businesses

employees to help meet the region’s ambient air quality standards. oriented specifically toward providing infrastructure--including gas,46

Sprawl creates a spatial mismatch between employers and the electric, water, telephone, and cable utilities--may be hit the hardest

labor market, both for low-wage jobs and low-skilled workers who as they are no longer able to collect revenue for capital that has

live in the central city, and for white-collar jobs and middle-income already been invested.

workers who live in the

suburbs. While47

opportunities may exist for

workers outside of their

current neighborhoods, it

may be difficult or

impossible for them to

commute, effectively

removing them from

portions of the job market.

In the Chicago metropolitan

area, for example, it is

estimated that the “spatial mismatch” cost of working in a peripheral

suburban location versus a central city location is between $300 and

49

Costs to Residents of New Suburbs

Residents of new suburbs, while initially spending less by

moving into a peripheral location, face costs as well. These include

the necessary costs of owning automobiles. The average two-car

family, for instance, spends nearly $9,000 annually--or 25 percent of

the household’s income after federal taxes--on owning and operating

automobiles. 50

Time and money are also lost by extended commute times due

either to a longer commute or to increased traffic congestion, or

both. According to the Federal Highway Administration, two billion

hours a year are lost to traffic delays above and beyond normal

commuting time, with a projected yearly cost of $34 billion.51

Commuting by automobile is necessary in many areas because

suburbs generally have poorly developed public transit systems, and

Community Redeveloped 2-16

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Persky and Wiewel, graph by S. Buntin.

because there is a jobs-to-population imbalance among suburbs. suburban residents are willing to accept lower wages in exchange for

Various studies, shown in the chart below, demonstrate the unpaid a reduction in commuting times.

costs--i.e., costs imposed on other drivers by individual commuting Residents of new suburbs may also be asked to pay the costs

decisions--of peak hour and congestion auto travel (for the U.S. of new infrastructure, either through impact fees passed on by the

generally, for the United Kingdom and North America generally, for developer, or through increased property taxes. Property taxes on a

Minneapolis, and for San Francisco). Additionally, congestion in new home in a new subdivision in Jeffersonville, Indiana--a suburb of52

the Chicago metro area costs society an estimated $150 to $500 per Louisville, Kentucky--were nearly three times the amount for a

year for each employee of a new suburban commercial or industrial similarly valued house in an older, adjacent neighborhood.

facility. Finally, new suburbanites pay social costs, as well. Suburbs53

Studies have also shown that suburban residents earn lower cause a sense of fragmentation and physical and social disconnection

wages at suburban workplaces than at central city workplaces-- for many residents. Peripheral settlements rarely provide social

perhaps the largest gathering points for neighbors, and if they do most are so far away

reason businesses that they require an auto to get to them, leading to social isolation

move to greenfield and loss of identity.

sites to begin with.

T h e s e s t u d i e s

conclude that while

men earn 2.5 percent

less in newer suburbs,

women earn 10

percent less, based on

the theory that

54

55

56

Costs to Residents of Central Cities and Older Suburbs

While wages may be lower in suburban areas, U.S. Census

data shows that per capita income is actually higher in many suburban

Community Redeveloped 2-17

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

City-Suburb Per Capita Income Gaps, 198957

Metro area City-suburb ratio

Per capita income - 1989

Metro area City Suburb

Detroit, Michigan $15,694 $9,443 $17,874 53%

Cleveland, Ohio 15,092 9,258 17,317 53

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 14,785 11,106 17,868 62

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 14,659 11,037 15,251 72

Syracuse, New York 13,918 11,351 17,868 77

Louisville, Kentucky 13,600 11,527 14,564 79

Columbus, Ohio 14,516 13,151 16,169 81

Richmond, Virginia 15,848 13,993 16,777 83

Houston, Texas 15,091 14,261 16,012 89

Indianapolis, Indiana 15,159 14,478 16,120 90

Madison, Wisconsin 15,542 15,143 15,976 95

Nashville, Tennessee 14,567 14,490 14,808 98

Raleigh, North Carolina 16,170 16,896 16,377 103

Albuquerque, New Mexico 13,954 14,018 11,892 118

Community Redeveloped 2-18

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

neighborhoods. According to David Rusk, “The city-suburb per may see a decline in property value and business volume as middle-

capita income ratio is the single most important indicator of an urban income residents leave. While the corner grocery store in an older,

area’s social health.” He argues that those metropolitan areas with mixed-use neighborhood was economically viable when58

the highest central city incomes compared to their suburban neighborhood vacancy rates were low, before sprawl, as middle-

counterparts are the most healthy. Those with the lowest central city income residents move out and vacancy rates increase, the grocery

per income capita--see table on previous page--are the most adverse store no longer has a critical mass of local residents and shoppers for

to residents of central cities and older suburbs. it to remain economically viable. As residents leave, the owner’s

Residents of central cities and older suburbs lose jobs and likelihood of remaining in business is greatly diminished. Even if the

access to jobs as employment becomes decentralized. Especially hard store does stay in business, decreased visibility is manifested in higher

hit are the low-income citizens who rely predominantly on public prices and reduced selection.

mass transit, for without a car it is difficult or impossible to commute Finally, as middle-income residents shift to the suburbs, so too

to suburban work locations. do government services and political power. A lack of services and

Sprawl also results in economic segregation and loss of social political support equate to physical, economic, social, and political

stability for older neighborhood residents, as middle-class residents under representation for residents of older, declining communities.

move farther and farther from the central city. Subsequently, jobs are

no longer created in older neighborhoods but rather in developing

suburbs. Between 1980 and 1990, for example, jobs declined in

Minneapolis and St. Paul and their inner suburbs, but increased

greatly in their southwestern developing suburbs. In fact, though the

suburbs represent only 27 percent of the metropolitan region’s

population, they gained 61 percent of the new jobs.59

Additionally, individual homeowners and small businesses

Costs to Farmers

Sprawl results in a permanent loss of agricultural land. In

fact, because metropolitan areas are often situated along historically

“strategic” locations, the agricultural land which is lost is usually of

the highest value--the prime land. It cannot simply be exchanged60

for other land, as the soil, nutrient levels, precipitation, and climate

Community Redeveloped 2-19

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Farmland is easily converted to suburban uses once the roads are in place. S. Buntin.

are all likely of different compositions than they were before. uses.

The rate of agricultural land lost to suburbanization is

alarming. In the Puget Sound Basin of Washington--home to Seattle

and its suburbs--200,000 acres of farmland were lost between 1967

and 1984; meanwhile, 200,000 acres of intense suburban and

150,000 acres of streets and highways were added. In California’s61

Central Valley--the nation’s leading agricultural region--nearly

500,000 acres of productive farmland were lost between 1982 and

1987 alone. Overall, more than one million acres of farmland are62

lost to development annually in the U.S.

Crop productivity declines as pollution directly attributable to

sprawl increases, as well. Ozone pollution alone can reduce crop

yields by up to 30 percent, lending to agricultural losses from

pollution estimated at over $200 million per year, according to the

Agricultural Issues Center at the University of California-Davis.63

Traditional farm communities can also lose their rural identity

as sprawl encroaches and, like Colorado towns Franktown and

Parker, they become bedroom suburbs. Similarly, sprawl may seem

like an inevitable outcome to owners of agricultural land. As such,

it creates uncertainty for landowners, who fail to continue investing

in their land as they wait to “sell out” to developers willing to pay

considerably more for land than it is worth under current agricultural

Costs to the Environment

The largest costs of all are to the natural environment.

Natural areas, including unique and sensitive lands such as wetlands,

are lost forever to the low-density ways of sprawl: a new 50-mile

stretch of freeway in Phoenix has resulted in the loss of 25,000 acres

of Sonoran Desert in just three years; between 42,000 and 60,00064

acres of forestland and other wildlife habitat are lost annually to

Community Redeveloped 2-20

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Loss of critical wildlife habitat is one of the largest environmental costs of suburban sprawl. W estern Area Power Administration.

suburbanization in Washington state; eighty percent of the original65

coastal marshes in the San Francisco Bay area--roughly 200,000

acres--have been lost to development. In fact, between 1982 and66

1992, 5,154,000 acres of forestland alone were converted to urban

uses in the U.S. In metropolitan areas across the country,67

tremendous amounts of undeveloped land are lost to new

subdivisions annually.

Development not only reduces critical habitat for plants, fish,

and wildlife, but it changes drainage patterns and microclimates

which can lead to devastating floods and damage from high winds.

Recent flooding in suburban areas of California and the Pacific

Northwest demonstrate all too well that streets and concrete gutters

are not an adequate replacement for the drainage patterns and erosion

control inherent in natural landscapes.

Air pollution is another major outcome of sprawl. Because

the automobile is essential for most residents of suburbia, and estimates that lung diseases, including respiratory tract infections,

because vehicle miles traveled are steadily increasing, air quality is asthma, and lung cancer stemming in large part from air pollution, are

significantly hindered. Air pollution, of which 33 percent is responsible for more than 300,000 deaths in America every year.

attributable directly to private automobile use, is not only Additionally, air pollution is expensive: in Southern

aesthetically unappealing, but is hazardous to human and California--where the South Coast Air Quality Management District

environmental health, as well. The American Lung Association mandates the strictest air pollution regulations in the country--air68

69

pollution costs $7.4 billion per year, or about $600 per resident.70

Community Redeveloped 2-21

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Traffic congestion between auto-oriented suburbs leads to air pollution from auto emissions. Center for Livable Communities.

Suburban commuters in the metropolitan Chicago area are likewise groundwater sources. Ten years ago Douglas County had a

responsible for up to $650 each in indirect costs resulting from air population of 20,000; it now has a population of 110,000, and is

pollution annually. zoned for half a million people. Yet, the life span of the aquifers71

Water quality and quantity are also adversely affected. While

irrigation for agriculture is the largest use of water across Colorado,

for example, localized areas under heavy development pressures--

such as Douglas County just south of Denver--threaten to deplete

supplying water to most of the county’s residents is well under 100

years and falling rapidly. Meanwhile, in the Minneapolis-St. Paul72

metropolitan area, the Praire Du Chien aquifer has become severely

polluted and depleted due in large part to sprawl in the southwestern

quadrant of the region. Water quantity and quality are inextricably73

linked to development pressures on the metropolitan fringe.

The Unsustainable Outcomes of Sprawl

Whether evaluated at specific suburban levels, or on the scale

of entire metropolitan regions, sprawl is economically,

environmentally, and socially costly. These costs result in inequities

that predominantly favor residents of the newer suburbs. Yet even

these residents pay as the entire metropolitan region suffers. And

sprawl seems to feed upon itself like a parasite intent on devouring its

host: “My rule of thumb is that the faster the rate of sprawl, the

faster the rate of abandonment,” says David Rusk, former mayor of

Albuquerque. “You look at Detroit, which has lost a million or so

people. It consumed land at thirteen times the rate of population

growth.”74

Contemporary, postwar development patterns that are low-

Community Redeveloped 2-22

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

density, land consuming, and auto-oriented cannot be sustained over physical uses, as well as social isolation and a lack of community

the long term. Their costs are too high economically, cohesion, it is socially unsustainable, as well.

environmentally, and socially. While low-density development Only in redeveloping the suburbs can regions and their

appears to be the most cost-effective approach in the short term, that communities secure a more sustainable future.

is only because it does not account for its full costs to society. When

the true costs discussed earlier in this chapter are factored in, sprawl

development falls far short of paying its own way.

But sprawl is unsustainable for more than economic reasons.

Even if a fair price could be placed on lost natural ecosystems, the

varied habitats and species that once inhabited them can never fully

be replaced, either in number or in quality. Views lost to miles of

similar rooflines could perhaps be returned, but the natural drainage

patterns and slopes in all likelihood never could be. Likewise, prime

agricultural land now developed cannot be returned to its former

state. Once natural and agricultural lands are lost, so are open spaces

and the recreational opportunities that come with them, plant and

animal species, the environment’s natural ability to filter many

pollutants, the region’s ability to produce food, community identity

which comes with greenways and other open space buffers, the

region’s ability to preserve its natural heritage, and a wealth of other

items.

Because sprawl leads to segregation of race, income, and

Community Redeveloped 2-23

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Endnotes and References

1. Van der Ryn, Sim. 1986. “The Suburban Context,” reprinted as “Sprawl a dirty word for Western mega-cities,” Sustainable Communities: A New Design Synthesis for The Denver Post. February 9, 1997. Pg. 14A. Cities, Suburbs, and Towns by Sim Van der Ryn and Peter Calthorpe. Sierra Club Books: San Francisco. Pg. 34. 7. “Sprawl a dirty word...” Pg. 14A.

2. American Farmland Trust figures provided by the National 8. “Sprawl a dirty word...” Pg. 14A Center for Appropriate Technology’s Act Locally Slide Show. 1996. The slide show is available through the 9. Rusk, David. 1995. Cities without Suburbs, Second Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development Home Edition. The Woodrow Wilson Center Press: Washington, Page, U.S. Department of Energy, at DC. Pg. 14. http://www.sustainable.doe.org.

3. Corbett, Judith, and Velasquez, Joe. September 1994. “The Ahwahnee Principles: Toward More Livable 11. Romer, Roy. July 1996. “Introductory Letter to Fellow Communities,” Western City. Article copy made available Coloradans,” Smart Growth & Development: A Work in by the Center for Livable Communities, Local Government Progress. Smart Growth and Development Action Center, Commission: Sacramento, CA. Pg. 3. Department of Local Affairs: Denver, CO. Pg. 2.

4. Los Angeles population and geographic area size growth 12. Denver Regional Council of Governments. November data is provided by Chris Leimberger of Robert Charles 1995. “Metro Vision 2020" Insert. Metro Vision 2020: Lesser & Co. 1996. Reprinted on the Periferia: New Vision Framework for the Denver Metropolitan Region. Pg. Urbanism Quotations Home Page, Internet Resources for 1. Architecture and Urban Design in the Caribbean, URL unavailable. 13. “Metro Vision 2020" Insert. Pg. 1.

5. Langdon, Philip. 1994. A Better Place to Live: Reshaping 14. Denver Regional Council of Governments. November the American Suburb. The University of Massachusetts 1995. Metro Vision 2020: Vision Framework for the Press: Amherst, MA. Pg. 1. Denver Metropolitan Region. Pg. 8.

6. Egan, Timothy. December 29, 1996. “Urban sprawl strains 15. DRCOG. Pg. 8. And, Katz, Alan. February 9, 1997. Western states.” The New York Times. Edited and “Building the Future,” The Denver Post. Pg. 12A.

10. Rusk. Pg. 14.

Community Redeveloped 2-24

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

16. Katz. Pg. 13A. 24. Smyth, Joseph. 1992. “The Economic Power of

17. 1990 Census of Population and Housing: Summary Social, Home Media: Los Angeles. Pg. 212. Economic, and Housing Characteristics - Colorado. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics 25. Jackson. Pg. 232. Administration, Bureau of the Census. 1990. 1990 CPH-5- 7; and A Century of the Colorado Census, compiled by 26. Jackson. Pp. 232-233. Suzanne Schulze, University of North Colorado: Greeley, CO. 1976. 27. The FHA’s role in suburban development and layout was

18. Downs, Anthony. 1994. New Visions for a Metropolitan Building, taught by Assistant Professor Michael Holleran. America. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC; and Urban and Regional Planning Program, College of Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA. Pg. 6. Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado at

19. Downs. Pg. 6.

20. Jackson, Kenneth T. 1985. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. Oxford University 29. Jackson. Pp. 168 and 171. Press, Inc.: New York. Pp. 238-241.

21. Jackson. Pp. 133.

22. For an in-depth discussion of early suburban expansion Alliance, and The Low Income Housing Fund. 1996. based on streetcars and other mass transit, see Warner, Beyond Sprawl: New Patterns of Growth to Fit the New Sam Bass, Jr. 1978. Streetcar Suburbs: The Process of California. BankAmerica Corporation: San Francisco. Pg. Growth in Boston (1870-1900), Second Edition. Harvard 1. University Press: Cambridge, MA. 208 Pages.

23. Calthorpe, Peter. 1994. “The Region,” an essay in Katz, the factors causing sprawl in Beyond Sprawl. Peter. 1994. The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. McGraw-Hill, Inc.: New York. Pg. xii. 33. DRCOG. Pg. 20.

Sustainable Development: Building the New American Dream,” a chapter in Walter, Bob, Arkin, Lois, and Crenshaw, Richard, Editors. Sustainable City Development: Concepts and Strategies for Eco-City Development. Eco-

discussed in URP 6635, A History of American City-

Denver: Denver, CO. Spring Semester 1996.

28. Jackson. Pg. 249.

30. Jackson, Pp. 234-235.

31. Bank of America, California Resources Agency, Greenbelt

32. The following discussion is based largely on the findings for

Community Redeveloped 2-25

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

34. Malone, Maggie, and Rogers, Patrick, Archer Biddle, Nina, Environment. Volume 2, Number 2. Thousand Words: Reiss, Spencer, Gordon, Jeanne, Kandell, Paul, and Glick, Seattle, WA. Pg. 13. Daniel. May 15, 1996. “Paved Paradise,” Newsweek. Pg. 44. 45. Burchell. Pg. 13.

35. Egan. Pg. 14A. 56. The Denver Regional Council of Government’s “The

36. Egan. Pg. 14A. metropolitan businesses’ employees can volunteer to take

37. The following discussion is based in part on the findings for winter months to reduce air pollution. The businesses are the costs of sprawl in Beyond Sprawl. often asked to provide funding for DRCOG’s RideArrangers

38. Smyth. Pg. 212. participate.

39. Orfield. Pg. 16. 47. Persky, Joseph, and Wiewel, Wim. May 1996. Central City

40. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assistance. 1995. Benefits? Great Cities Institute, University of Illinois at The Technological Reshaping of Metropolitan America. Chicago: Chicago. Pp. 6-7. U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC. OTA- ETI-643. 48. Orfield. Pg. 11.

41. Research conducted by the consulting firm M.Cubed, 49. Persky and Wiewel. Pg. 7. reprinted in The Urban Ecologist: The Journal of Urban Ecology. 1996 Number 4. Urban Ecology: Oakland, CA. 50. Langdon. Pg. 11. Pg. 6.

42. Orfield, Myron. April 1996. “Metropolitics: Social and Smyth. Pg. 212. Economic Polarization Vs. Community and Stability,” Northwest Report. Number 20. Northwest Area 52. Persky and Wiewel. Pg. 3. Foundation: St. Paul, MN. Pg. 11.

43. Orfield. Pg. 11.

44. Burchell, Robert W. 1996. “Understanding Sprawl,” On the Ground: The Multimedia Journal on Community, Design & 55. Personal communication with David Buntin, resident of

Pollution Solution” is an example of a program in which

an alternative mode of transportation to work during the

“Free Ride Home” program to encourage employees to

and Suburban Development: Who Pays and Who

51. The Federal Highways Administration data is available at

53. Persky and Wiewel. Pg. 10.

54. Persky and Wiewel. Pg. 10.

Community Redeveloped 2-26

Suburbs and Suburban Sprawl

Jeffersonville, Indiana. 67. Data from the 1992 National Resources Inventory, U.S.

56. Langdon. Pp. 23-26. Washington, DC. 1995.

57. Rusk. Pg. 31. 68. Beyond Sprawl. Pg. 10.

58. Rusk. Pg. 33. 69. American Lung Association Fact Sheet - Outdoor Air

59. Orfield. Pg. 13. DC. Available through 1-800-LUNG-USA.

60. The loss of prime agricultural land to development was 70. Beyond Sprawl. Pg. 10. discussed in URP 6656, Regional Land Use Planning and Analysis, taught by Professor Thomas Clark. Urban and 71. Perskey and Wiewel. Pg. 4. Regional Planning Program, College of Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado at Denver: Denver, CO. 72. Johnson, Dave. Summer 1996. “The Politics of Water Fall Semester 1996. Planning: State Legislature Defeats Depleting Aquifer

61. Washington State Energy Office, Washington State Urban and Regional Planning Program, College of Department of Transportation, Department of Ecology, and Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado at Energy Outreach Center. June 1996. Redevelopment for Denver: Denver, CO. Pp. 11-12. Livable Communities. Energy Outreach Center: Olympia, WA. Pg. 12. 73. Orfield. Pg. 18.

62. Beyond Sprawl. Pg. 9. 74. Egan. Pg. 14A.

63. Beyond Sprawl. Pg. 9.

64. Katz. Pg. 14A.

65. Redevelopment for Livable Communities. Pg. 19.

66. Salvesen, David. 1994. Wetlands: Mitigating and Regulating Development Impacts, Second Edition. The Urban Land Institute: Washington, DC. Pg. 2.

Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

Pollution. 1996. American Lung Association: Washington,

Information Amendment,” The New Colorado Planner.