Different Sprawl Patterns in the U.S. Cities

After The World War II, urban sprawl has been a major form of the development of the urban areas across the United States. But it is usually neglected that speed of urban sprawl in different American regions is various.

Traditionally, Los Angeles is an icon in the mind of the Americans which represents huge sprawl and auto dependency.

Although car use is an undeniable characteristic of L.A., an interesting report conducted in 2001 showed that L.A. and generally western cities have better status compared to Northeastern and southern cities in case of sprawl. This research entitled “Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ across the U.S.” was done by William Fulton, and his colleagues Rolf Pendall, Mai Nguyen, and Alicia Harrison for the Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.

Who Sprawls Most?

The research shows that during the 15 years of 1982 to 1997, there has been higher level of sprawl in the Northeastern and Southern cities compared to the Western ones. The Western settled more population and consumed less land during the mentioned years in comparison with Northeast, South and Midwest. In general, in 1997, the highest metropolitan population density has been related to West region with 4.85 persons per urbanized acre. At the same year Northeast region had a population density of 4.51 persons per urbanized acre.

These conclusions are based on calculating the negative or positive growth of population of the urban areas on the one hand, and the negative or positive growth of land consumption on the other hand. If the rate of population growth is faster than the rate of the land consumption, it means there is “densifying”. If the speed of land urbanization is faster than the population growth, then we will have “sprawling”.

Los Angeles Versus New York

An example of the comparison of the West and Northeast regions are Los Angeles and New York. In 1982, L.A. had a population and population density of 12.1 millions and 8.09 persons per urbanized acre. While in the same year, New York had 17.5 millions and 9.44 respectively.
In 1997, the condition was somehow different. In this year the population and population density were 15.8 millions and 8.31 persons for L.A. and 18.6 and 7.99 for New York. Therefore we can see that in 1997 the two cities were at a similar position but Los Angeles had found a better way to accommodate new residents through the 15 years time. In fact L.A. had settled 3.7 million new residents in 412000 acres of marginal land while New York accommodated 1.13 million people in 478000 acres.

Association of Different Regional Characteristics with Density

A question that the authors tried to answer was what characteristics of land were associated to density. They concluded that the following characteristics were associated with low density: lower population, fast growth, few foreign born residents, more Hispanics residents, high dependence on local revenue sources for education, fewer houses on sewers, adjacent to at least one rural county, flat land, little or no wetland, most land owned by private owners, little prime farmland. On the other hand the opposite characteristics were associated with high density regions.
Although this research is related to some years ago, but at present, it is expected to have the same patterns of urban growth and differences between regions. So according to Fulton and his colleagues, it seems that the cities of California, Nevada, and Arizona have better patterns of growth and sprawl containment.

Reference:

• Fulton, W. and Pendall, R. and Nguyen, M. and Harrison, A. (2001), “Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ across the U.S.”, Center for Urban & Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution, Survey Series.

Read more at Suite101: Different Sprawl Patterns in the U.S. Cities http://architecture.suite101.com/article.cfm/different-sprawl-patterns-in-the-us-cities#ixzz0nDjioeS1