SPRAWL and SMART GROWTH

 Presentation by Edward Lawrence to the Mobile League of Women Voters, November 13, 2002

 1. What is Sprawl?

One way to define sprawl is to identify what it is not.   It is not traditional neighborhood develop­ment.   Traditional neighborhoods were the dominant form of habitation throughout the rest of the world to the present, and throughout the United States until after the Second World War.  The features of the traditional neighborhood are mixed land uses, diversity in architectural style, density high enough to support mass transit, pedestrian-friendly communities of varied population, and alternative choices of transportation.  Traditional neighborhoods have a center, where common activities of commerce and culture could take place, and residents of the neighborhood are rarely more than a five minute walk from a grocery store.  Blocks are generally small, with a grid of streets offering alternative routes for people to walk from home to shopping, church, or even work. 

The publication New Urban News uses the following criteria to determine if a development qualifies as being new urbanist, i.e. traditional neighborhood development (TND):  

1. Rule out any project that is gated or than lacks sidewalks;
2. ... or that has super-blocks and cud-de-sacs.
3. The street pattern of a TND merges into the street pattern of adjacent developments.
4. Rule out single-use projects (houses, or stores, or offices); various types of buildings, and housing types, should be seamlessly integrated.
5. There should be a neighborhood center within easy walking distance from all dwellings.
6. Buildings should be designed to make the street feel safe and inviting by having front doors, porches and windows facing the street, not just garage doors.
7. The “popsicle test”: an eight-year-old should be able to walk to a store and buy a popsicle without having to deal with fast moving cars.

 A ten page “Traditional Neighborhood Development Checklist” is found in the book Suburban Nation.

An excellent slide show illustrating the characteristics of sprawl was prepared by the Buffalo NY League of Women Voters: > www.lwvbn.org <.

 2. What Causes Sprawl?

After the Second World War the traditional ideas of city building were ignored, and a new model created by developers, planners, highway engineers, and government officials.  The new model, which we have now come to call sprawl, intentionally emphasizes separation of land uses, depend­ence on the automobile, low densities, curvilinear streets & cud-de-sacs, super-blocks, and monot­onous predictable design.  Resulting from these goals were unintended consequences: environ­mental degradation, high costs of constructing and maintaining the public infrastructure, traffic congestion, and social isolation.

There are several factors that caused the birth of sprawl following the Second World War.  One was the F.H.A. and V.A. loan programs which provided low interest mortgages for suburban single-family homes.  The second factor was the creation of the 41,000 mile Interstate Highway program, building expressways to the new suburban subdivisions.   This was accompanied by an intentional neglect of mass transit.  The expressway interchanges provided the ideal locations for shopping centers, which started sprouting in the late 1950’s.    Racial fears and bank red-lining of the tradition­al urban neighborhoods led many people to flea to the suburbs.  In the 1970’s corporations started moving to the suburbs in increasing numbers.  Another factor causing sprawl was the influence of city planners who, after successfully separating noxious factories from dwellings in the late ninete­enth century decided that separating all uses from all other uses (even high density residential from lower density residential) would be a good idea and a justification for continued employment.  To­gether with the traffic engineers, planners have seen to it that the zoning and road specifications that result in sprawl are imposed as the law of the land.

Federal government spending and policies continue today to influence sprawl: large amounts are going into highway funding, little into transit.  Favorable tax treatment of home-ownership, although appearing to be location neutral, really benefits higher income single family home subdivisions as opposed to higher density urban neighborhoods.   Federal housing programs encourage low income housing in central city areas, contributing to the white flight to the suburbs and adding to sprawl. At the local level large-lot zoning and prohibition against multi-family housing keeps the poor out of suburban areas, therefore contributing to economic segregation and further white flight.

Architect and leader of the New Urbanism movement Andres Duany describes how the retail strip came about: “But unlike America ’s prewar suburbs, the new subdivisions were being financed by programs that addressed only homebuilding, and therefore neglected to set aside any sites for corner stores.  As a result, shopping required not only its own distinct method of financing and development but also its own locations.  Placed along the wide high-speed collector roads between housing clusters, the new shops responded to their environment by pulling back from the street and construct­ing large freestanding signage.  In this way the now ubiquitous strip shopping center was born.”  (Suburban Nation, page 9)

3. Why is Sprawl Bad?

We know that sprawl is ugly, but beyond this are there reasons to consider it as bad?   The growing consensus, except among traffic engineers, is that, yes, there are many serious problems that accompany sprawl.   Among the problems with sprawl as identified by the Sierra Club and other organizations are the following:

Sprawl increases traffic on our streets and highways.  It lengthens trips and forces to drive everywhere.  Residents of sprawling communities drive 3 to 4 times as much as those living in compact, well-planned areas.  The average American driver spends the equivalent of 55  8-hour workdays, behind the wheel per year (443 hours).

The resulting traffic congestion imposes severe costs.   The Texas Transportation determined that traffic congestion in 68 U.S. metropolitan areas caused an average annual delay of 36 hours per person.  This imposed a cost of $78 billion, the value of 4.5 billion hours of delay and 6.8 billion gallons of excess fuel consumed.

Sprawl contributes to more traffic fatalities.  The report “Measuring Sprawl and its Impact” by Smart Growth America discovered that the ten most sprawling metropolitan areas had 36 deaths for every 100,000 residents, while the ten metro areas with the least sprawl had only 23 deaths for every 100,000 residents.   Suburban teenagers are more likely to be killed in a traffic accident than an urban teenager is to be killed in a gang fight.

Sprawl pollutes our air and water.  By increasing our reliance on cars and driving, sprawl makes our air dirtier and less healthy.  Motor vehicles generate over 12 billion pounds of toxic chemicals each year, almost 50 pounds per person.    Wetlands that could remove these toxins are being drained to build sprawling new developments.

Sprawl worsens the damage from killer floods.  Over 100 people die in floods per year, and almost $9 billion in property damage is caused, much of it in places where weak zoning laws allow developers to drain wetlands, build in floodplains, and remove trees that slow stormwater and reduce runoff.

Sprawl destroys parks, farms, and open space.   Over a million acres of parks, farms, and open space are lost to sprawl every year.   Deforestation harms the health of the urban ecosystem since trees improve air quality.

Sprawl wastes our tax money.   Cities and counties must pay millions for new water and sewer lines, new schools, and increased police and fire protection.   These costs are not fully offset by the taxes paid by the new users, so residents of traditional urban neighborhoods are forced to pay higher taxes. 

Sprawl uses more resources.  A Sprawl-like development is likely to use five times more pipe and wire, five times as much heating and cooling energy, 35 times as much land and 15 times as much pavement than compact urban developments.

Sprawl crowds our children’s schools.   Schools in the suburbs are crowded while center city schools sit empty.

Sprawl contributes to racial segregation.  In addition to causing harm in the newly developing suburban areas, sprawl causes problems in the central cities and in the older first ring of suburbs.   Suburban development encourages those in the central city and older suburbs who can afford it to move further out.  This leaves a concentration of lower income residents, often minorities, in these urban areas.   These families struggle as their wages do not keep up with rising costs of housing, childcare, transportation and other costs of living.  In addition to a deterioration in the housing stock, the central city and older suburbs with their stagnant tax base sometimes cannot adequately maintain the utility infrastructure.   Because many of the new jobs are in outlying factories, offices and stores, and these outlying areas do not have moderately priced housing or public transit, the lower income people in the central city and older suburbs to not have access to those jobs.   This causes a higher incidence of welfare in the older central cities.

Sprawl contributes to social isolation.  Because walking is less likely an a sprawling suburb, front porches are often lacking, and there is no neighborhood grocery store, coffee shop, or pub at which to meet neighbors, people are more isolated.

When the principles of traditional neighborhood design are applied to new development we call it “smart growth”, which the Sierra Club defines as: “…intelligent, well-planned development that channels growth into existing areas, provides public transportation options, and preserves farm land and open space.”

Many organizations and publications dealing with urban issues have lists of what to do to fight sprawl and promote smart growth.  Most of the proposals are very general.  In the report “Measuring Sprawl and its Impact”, Smart Growth America suggested the following policy recommendations:

1. Reinvest in neglected communities and promote more housing opportunities.

2. Rehabilitate abandoned properties.

3. Encourage new development or redevelopment in already built-up areas.

4. Create and nurture thriving mixed-use centers of activity.

5. Support growth management policies.

6. Craft transportation policies that complement smarter growth.

The Smart Growth Network, a diverse coalition of 32 national associations concerned with plan­ning, development, and the environment, published a report: “Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Policies for Implementation” in which they identified ten principles as a first step in articulating the goals of smart growth, including the following:

1. Mix land uses.

2. Take advantage of compact building design.

3. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices

4. Create walkable neighborhoods.

5. Foster distinctive attractive communities with a strong sense of place.

6. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas.

7. Make development decisions predictable, fair and cost effective.

8. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.

The following three sections identify selected specific proposals, broken down by the level of government (i.e. federal, state, or local) most likely to be in a position to potentially implement them.

4. What Can Be Done at the Federal Level to Fight Sprawl?

Federal action to fight sprawl can take the form of funding for environmental and transportation initiatives that promote smart growth, and in incentives to communities to carry out smart growth planning efforts.  Among the specific recommendations from anti-sprawl groups are the following:

* Provide funding for transportation alternatives: bicycling & hiking, public transportation, and maint­enance. This is being done through the ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency) Act.

* Revise government programs and tax policies that promote sprawl.  Economic development tax abate­ment and subsidies may be counter-productive.  In Anoka , a suburb of Minneapolis-St. Paul, 26 of the 29 companies relocating there due to free land subsidies, moved from the urban core area.

* Redesign public housing projects to make them more like a traditional urban neighborhood.

* Promote the revitalization of already developed areas rather than conversion of rural land to urban use. 

This can be accomplished by improving schools, reducing crime, encouraging residential rehabilitation, by promoting historic preservation, and by encouraging new construction on vacant center city land.

Improved inner city schools might be achieved by establishing a mandate for balanced resources among school districts.

* Provide tax incentives to invest in lower income central city areas.  A new program, The New Markets Tax Credit, is doing this with a 39%, 7 year tax credit for investing in low income urban areas.

* The Community Character Act: (S 975, passed by Senate Environment & Public Works Committee) would help states & localities initiate smart growth planning strategies.

* Supporting farmers and shoring up the farm economy would slow the conversion of agricultural land to urban uses, and funding for open space acquisition, e.g. greenbelts, forest areas, wetlands, etc. would help.

5 What Can Be Done at the State Level to Fight Sprawl?

Due in part to our antiquated state constitution, cities and counties do not have many of the home rule powers to fight sprawl.   Nevertheless, there are some things that could be accomplished.  Many steps could be taken, and with a new governor now may be the time to push for actions at the state level. 

* Provide adequate funding for education, environmental protection, public transportation, and other state initiatives to promote smart growth.  This could be accomplished only with major tax reform in Alabama .  Fortunately the Alabama Business Council has just launched a new effort, the Campaign for Alabama , to push for tax reform.  

* The State could take action to promote the availability of public transportation.

* The State could take action to encourage construction of bicycle & hiking trails.

* The State could divert highway funding from new construction to maintenance and repair of existing highways.

* The State could increase the protection of open spaces including wet lands, floodplains, and important habitats.

* The State could (but is unlikely to) help in enacting urban growth boundaries, as has been done in Oregon .

* School requirements could be changed to permit smaller schools.

* Steps could be taken to encourage the use of location-efficient mortgages.

* The Alabama Commission on Environmental Initiatives issued a series or recommendations in January 2001.  Some of these proposals could be raised for consideration once again.

* That Commission proposed that an Alabama Smart Growth Commission be established, as was done in North Carolina (the Smart Growth Alliance) and elsewhere.  The new governor could be asked to consider establishing such a Commission.  

6. What Can Be Done at the Local Level to Fight Sprawl?

At the regional level we have the South Alabama Regional Planning Commission encompassing Mobile and Baldwin County .  They are sensitive to smart growth.  It is doubtful that Mobile County government will take any role in the smart growth debate any time soon, but the City of Mobile is well on the way with a Smart Growth Commission appointed by the Mayor.  Things that can be done at the local level to fight sprawl and promote smart growth include the following:

 * Revising subdivision ordinances, zoning codes, and street standards.   A generic Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance is available from the Congress for the New Urbanism.

 * Local governments could begin to plan proactively, and not merely react to proposals.

 * Developers could be required to pay impact fees for utilities & services through an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO).

 * Property tax impact studies could be required for new developments.

 * Encouraging the design of pedestrian friendly development.

 * Local action to increase the protection of open spaces and to deal with Brownfields and Greyfields sites.

 * Governments should practice smart growth principles in government building design & location.

 * Using regional government to handle issues regional in scope.

7. What Can Community Organizations Do?

For an organization that wants to take on the project of addressing the issue of sprawl. I would recommend giving consideration to some of the following actions:

 ■    Research what other chapters of the League of Women Voters have done in efforts to fight the negative effects of sprawl.  (e.g. the Buffalo/Niagara NY Chapter)

 ■    Research what groups such as the Sierra Club are doing, and if there is an effort underway in the Mobile area.

 ■    Have a representative attend coferences, such as Annual New Partners fro Smart Growth conference.

 ■    Contact professors at local colleges and universities who have an interest in urban issues, and recruit their assistance in the effort to research the issue and recommend steps to be taken.

 ■    Talk to top officials at state, county, and city environmental protection, transportation, and planning agencies to determine if they are aware of the problems of sprawl, and if their agencies are doing anything to address the problems.

 ■     Perhaps in cooperation with the Alabama Chapter of the American Planning Association, review zoning and subdivision ordinances to see if they permit traditional neighborhood, or worse if they require sprawl.   If necessary lobby for their revision or replacement.

 ■    Review major public works proposals (e.g. the proposed Mobile to Baldwin bridge) to see if they will contribute to sprawl or to smart growth.

 ■    Explore the possibility of bringing together organizations from throughout the state to form an “Alabama Smart Growth Alliance”.

 The effort to fight sprawl will involve a multi-faceted approach: research, analysis, public education, lobbying, and in all likelihood electoral action – getting people elected to boards, commissions, and various public offices, who will support the steps necessary to bring about smart growth legislation.   It will involve educating yourselves, public officials, developers, and the public about the benefits of smart growth.  It might be that a broad-based state-wide coalition or alliance might be the most productive way to proceed.

Return to the Citizens for Responsible Government Home Page

For a discussion of "What Makes Downtown Special" go to the web site of Downtown Research Company.