ipl-logo

The Sprawl Debate Research Paper

746 Words3 Pages

Michael Pesso
Professor Lee Ballestero
8 June, 2018
Sprawl Debate Assignment

After reading and analyzing both the “Principles of New Urbanism” document and “The Sprawl Debate” document, I definitely notice some similarities and differences on many of issues going on. More specifically for this assignment, I will be comparing and contrasting the issue of Social Inequality. To start off, the one thing that I can think about after reading the two pieces was that it seems like the “Principles of New Urbanism” document discusses the smart growth movement as if it were a make believe fantasy place and “The Sprawl Debate” is the harsh reality of it. Also, the “New Urbanism” document does not really have any real plans of actions but only just ideas …show more content…

It states that, “Within neighborhoods, a broad range of housing types and price levels can bring people of diverse ages, races, and incomes into daily interaction, strengthening the personal and civic bonds essential to an authentic community” (section 13, page 2). When first reading this quote, he or she reading it would be in agreement that having certain areas that are more affordable would help blend the community. Yet in fact, “The Sprawl Debate” makes a valid point, contrasting what the “New Urbanism” article said, that by dedicating certain buildings and areas of the city for low income people does not allow the community to become more blended because those who are wealthy would never be around the “cheap” area of the city, and the poor people who eventually be drawn out because they would not be able to afford goods since the prices would increase due to the city caring more about catering to the wealthy people. In “The Sprawl Debate”, by Peter Gordon, the document points out that, “New Urbanism” builds an image of community and a rhetoric of place-based civic pride and consciousness for those who do not need it, while abandoning those that do to their ‘underclass’ …show more content…

Zoning is the way the city decides to use up its land, and when the city sets aside certain areas to be made for wealthy or the poor it may create issues. The two social classes will have a hard time interacting because the wealthier people will go to the areas of the city that may look nicer and go out to events, while the less well off people will not be able to afford going into those same areas that the wealthy people are living. This may lead to gentrification due to the lower class potentially being forced out since they may not be able to afford rent or goods with the influx of upper and middle classes. Calabasas is a great example for today’s day and age because it has increasingly become a more expensive area to live in because there is an influx of people who can afford to live there coming in, which then pushes out the lower income people in order to make room for the upperclassmen. Since zoning is a city power, the federal government cannot intervene and tell the city whether or not to zone, and what those zoning areas should be used for. The federal government sits on the sidelines until a bigger issue like air quality, water quality, or endangered species come up, if this is the case then they are eligible to step

Open Document