1

Fiona Coughlan

Professor Funke

Final Assignment

Urban Sprawl: Can We Find A Balance Between Growth and Preservation?

Urban sprawl is a massive consequence of capitalist prosperity that results in the outward

growth of urban centers into suburbs and regional lands. It is a mass development movement and

is very hazardous to the Earth because it causes a reliance on fossil fuels and the destruction of

flora, fauna and habitats. It also drastically raises the amount of pollution and reduces the quality

of local air, land and water. Sprawl encourages class distinction and discourages the concept of

community because people are distributed over such a broad spectrum, that more and more

towns need to be created to establish some level of organization. Everyone and everything is so

far away from each other that centralized decentralization begins to occur and boundaries are

produced without realization. The causes of sprawl are simple; developers, real estate agencies

and important CEOs are some of the culprits behind it. Real estate agencies/developers are

focused on getting the masses to move outward and into their new developments to generate

profit. Land outside the city is much cheaper, so they purchase and develop it for much less

compared to what they make in sales. Big businesses also move to cheap, spacious locations

outside the city, bringing with them a demand for jobs that no one can resist. Another cause of

sprawl is the pursuit of the “American Dream.” Every U.S citizen has the right/opportunity to

live in a large house with a garage, a car and a front lawn. This American Dream means privacy,

safety, and the freedom to raise a family without having to deal with the cluster, noise and

poverty of the city. Many regarded the American Dream as the ultimate indication of success,

especially throughout the twentieth century. The final cause of sprawl is racism and

2

socioeconomic prejudice. Poor, lower class individuals tend to live in cities due to convenience,

lack of adequate transportation to commute, and lack of funds to move away. In many major U.S

cities like Los Angeles, it is clear that those who live on the outskirts of the city want nothing to

do with those who are forced to live in the city. They live in large gated communities with

security guards and high-tech surveillance while the lower class (consisting largely of

immigrants) is forced to deal with the crowded and dirty conditions of the city. Numerous works

elaborate on this trend, for example Fortress L.A by Mike Davis.

Sprawl needs to be combatted before it is too late. There is only so much development

the world can tolerate before it begins to break down under the strain. It is essential that urban

planners take a stand against it and conceive new innovative methods of growth without

extending the physical limits of the city. More sustainable infrastructure needs to be incorporated

in these methods that will lessen the toll on the environment. Also, new public works and

internal renovations need to focus on including residents of every class and background-they

should not permit spatial boundaries. The decrease of sprawl will benefit people and the Earth

more than we realize. Luckily, many planners have realized this and have begun to pass

legislation and take new approaches to end sprawl, or at least slow it down. These approaches are

smart growth, new urbanism, sustainable development, and the ecological city. We can see in

some U.S cities that the initiative has already been taken to begin applying sustainable policy to

development procedures. An example is Portland, Oregon who, unlike its west coast rival Los

Angeles, has crafted a “Comprehensive Plan” that capitalizes on uniting neighborhoods while

making them as sustainable as possible. The plan addresses every feature of the city. On page 19

they discuss transportation, “Active transportation helps reduce the need to drive which helps

reduce household costs. It also helps improve personal and environmental health and reduce

3

carbon emissions by making it safe and pleasant to walk, bike or take transit. A transportation

network that integrates nature into neighborhoods, increases people’s access to the outdoors,

reduces carbon emissions, provides corridors for wildlife movement, and aids in catching and

treating storm water” (Bureau of Planning and Sustainability). This concept and many more like

it are aspects of sustainable development/smart growth that are so simple to integrate into every

city!

According to This is Smart Growth, smart growth is defined as “a kind of planning that

preserves the best of the past while creating a bright future for generations to come. It can create

new neighborhoods while maintaining existing ones that are attractive, convenient, safe, and

healthy” (Page 5). This definition falls under the umbrella of sustainable development. The focus

of the two is on improving what already exists, making substructures as eco-friendly and socio-

relatable as possible. Sustainable development tends to place more focus on environmental

preservation, while smart growth includes that, but also emphasizes the continuation of new

developments. According to the American Planning Association, smart growth is a way “to meet

the challenges of sustainability” (Planning Practices and Research). They say this because it

has always been difficult to transform already made, physical human settlements into more

sustainable buildings. New urbanism is, as stated on The Charter for the New Urbanism’s

website, “restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions,

the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse

districts, and the conservation of natural environments.” The American Planning Association

related new urbanism to sustainability in that “it is a guide for development as something that

can be sustained and interests in its precepts has been produced as being the result of

sustainability becoming an issue to developers” (Planning Practices and Research). New

4

urbanism is a very modern methodology that is being adopted in major cities like Detroit,

Michigan. New Urbanism, gentrification and regeneration of the global urban strategy

“encompass a wide range of social, economic, and geographical shifts, and the point of these

contrasting arguments is to push the issue of how varied the experience is and how these

contrasting worlds fit together” (Smith Page 438). New Urbanist cities have had a tendency to

attract younger minds and activists, especially in the United States. Its popularity is growing

slowly but surely throughout the nation, from urban planners to students. The ecological city is

the final concept that is mentioned in the fight to battle sprawl. The American Planners

Association comments on the method saying it is “transformation…toward greater

sustainability” (Planning Practice and Research). The ecological city, like the other two

proposals, falls under the broad category of sustainable development but focuses much more on

the preservation of biodiversity and the collaboration of ecology and economy. Economy and

society are not to infringe too strongly on the boundaries of the ecosystems being preserved and

that already are in existence. Cities like Alexandria, Virginia have adopted this plan of action for

their city and have reported to thrive under it.

Smart growth, new urbanism, the ecological city, and sustainable development as a whole

have all been collaborative efforts not only by planners, but by architects, politicians,

environmental activists, townspeople, city councils, land-use officials, business owners, and

many more. There are many that support the cause whole-heartedly, but also many that oppose it

because it places limits on growth and profit. In this situation, in order to instill authority in the

face of developers and companies, planners have to take on a negotiator role. They need to agree

on just what needs to be done and advocate for its construction. If planners were to take on the

role of mediator when trying to incorporate sustainable development policies, there would be no

5

progress shown. It would be a constant compare and contrast battle between different interest

groups that would be pointless and time consuming. Each of these proposals call for a major

cooperation effort on everyone’s part and a complete renaissance of development outline and

editions to old groundwork as well. Everyone needs to support the cause because the tasks

involved, like the rebuilding of city centers and mixed land-use zoning, are large-scale and

largely affect the residents.

The effort and struggle that is involved in establishing smart growth, new urbanism, and

the ecological city is worth it in the end because they will each have such an impact on the Earth

and society in the long run. They combat the issue of sprawl I discussed in my midterm paper by

largely decreasing the speed with which sprawl is occurring. Despite the fact that smart growth

still encourages growth, it is a strong catalyst nonetheless. What makes each of these plans

realistic is the fact that their technicalities are relatively simple. They focus on tactics like

walkable communities, revitalizing vacant properties, setting aside natural greeneries/sites

dedicated to the preservation of the natural world, creating innovative and sustainable housing,

instilling necessities like grocery stores and schools closer to neighborhoods, and modernizing

public transit. Los Angeles would be a target city for these plans, although the cluster that has

already been created by poor planning would provide a huge obstacle. It lacks the convenience of

walkability and cars overtake the transit system. Los Angeles is completely developed from

Beverly Hills, to Hollywood, to Long Beach. There is little if any reserved green space, which is

why the city has terrible air quality, is a huge heat island, and why there is increased salinity in

the surrounding bodies of water. The crowded conditions also make the city unhealthy and

unpleasant, which inevitably causes those with money and influence to move outside the central

urban sphere to escape it. Those low income minority families are, as a result, stuck in the urban

6

with no other alternatives. New Urbanism and smart growth would break down these class-

distinctions by making every kind of individual inhabit the same vicinity. “Places that are

designed with people in mind show careful attention to the experience each person will have

with the street, the sidewalk, the buildings, and the surrounding environment” (Page 20, This is

Smart Growth). Centralized decentralization would gradually disappear over time and in turn,

cultural/monetary restrictions would follow suit. Los Angeles is a city that would have to be

totally redesigned in order to integrate these policies, but it could and should be an option for the

near feature-especially since there are so many cities in the United States that are similar to it and

need to change as well. Portland Oregon’s annually updates it climate action plan for this

purpose, something L.A. should consider!

My opinion on smart growth, new urbanism, the ecological city and sustainable

development overall is that it is the best option that we have right now in confronting urban

sprawl. Sustainable development is the most realistic way to balance social equity, economic

development, and environmental protection while also tackling urban sprawl. It is the method

that will least offend the most people. According to the Campbell article Green Cities, “In the

battle of big public ideas, sustainability has won: the task of the coming years is simply to work

out the details, and to narrow the gap between its theory and practice” (Page 8). In my opinion,

the only weaknesses of the projects are that they will take too long to be put into effect. By the

time the projects are passed through legislation, the Earth will have already hit a turning point in

climate change! To improve the situation, I would say that the federal government should take a

stance on the issue. They should begin to enforce sustainable development procedures NOW on

new housing projects and businesses. Affirmative action needs to be taken to make a wave of

change, and it starts with ending urban sprawl!

7

Urban and Regional Planning is a very complex and interesting subject that requires a

fierce amount of time, effort, and negotiating/mediation. Not everyone is going to get what they

want all the time, but you must listen to their opinions and try to include them as much as

possible, nonetheless. When you are an urban planner, you must consider the social, economic

and environmental implications of your decisions while also considering what the general public

wants, like convenience and location. I also realized that you must be able to interact with many

different kinds of people on a regular basis. Employer relations are necessary. Planning is a field

that requires knowledge of many different subjects. You must be qualified in ecology/biology,

public administration, business, architecture, interior and exterior design, etc. This paper opened

my eyes to all of these things. When dealing with such a recurring and prominent issue like

urban sprawl, you need to know just what you are going to discuss (down to every last detail)

and who the right people are. You need to cogitate everything that could and would go wrong as

well. This paper also taught me what exactly urban sprawl is and how much is it negatively

affecting the world around us. I never would have known what smart growth or sustainable

development or new urbanism or centralized decentralization was unless I took the time to

research it for this paper. I am happy I addressed the issue of sprawl because I feel that in today’s

modern society, people are more focused on capitalism and profit and expansion than ever. They

do not realize the toll sprawl has on not only the environment, but on social class. We must work

together with local and national organizations to stop this consequence of capitalism!

Downsizing is really not that bad, America!

8

Bibliography

Campbell, S. (1996). (1996). Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable Development. Journal of the American

Planning Association, 62 (3): 296-312.

Davis, M. 2011. Fortress L.A. In The City Reader. LeGates, R. & F. Stout (eds). 5th edition. London: Routledge, 195-201.

Edward., and Edwards, Mary. 2010. Planning Practices and Research. How Possible is Sustainable Urban Development? An Analysis of Planners’ Perceptions about New Urbanism, Smart Growth and the Ecological City. Accessed on 11/12/13 at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02697459.2010.511016#preview

Nechyba, Thomas., and Walsh, Randall. 2004. Urban Sprawl. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 18:177-200.

Smith, Neil. 2002. New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy. Accessed on 11/20/13 at http://www.unc.edu/courses/2005fall/geog/021/001/HumanGeogFall05/smith.pdf

Charter of the New Urbanism. Congress for the New Urbanism. 1997. 1:1. Project for Transportation Reform. Web. Dec. 15 2013.

“The City of Portland, Oregon." Comprehensive Plan Update Portland Plan Implementation RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2013.

2006. This is Smart Growth. The Smart Growth Network. 2:5-32.

9