Urban Sprawl In American City

The idea of sprawl in places like California may seem like the ideal method of expansion due to the quality of life it temporarily grants the privileged, but it is actually problematic because it doesn’t consider the troubling issues that come along with it. It’s true that our American cities are growing rapidly and have become overcrowded. Our accessibility to goods and services have become harder to get to due to increased traffic, jobs and income have become scarce, and poverty and inequality have increased as well. This is why so many people want to move away from city centers to improve their quality of life. However, the problem is that urban sprawl may only temporarily improve these issues, rather than permanently. Sprawl does not consider

One of the major issues sprawl has seemingly encouraged is an automobile dependant environment. The more sprawled out a city becomes, the more dependence we have on our vehicles to get us to work, school, home and places of leisure. This pushes us away from having an effective public transportation system because of its inaccessibility and poorly routed schedules that are inconvenient for many. This is why “smart growth” has progressively been promoted as an alternative method to sprawl because it focuses on public transportation and walking as main sources to building a better environment. However, Robert Bruegmann does not believe that “smart growth” is an effective alternative because heavily dense areas require longer commuting times. He explains, “Because the automobile...allows individuals to travel directly from point A to point B wherever the owner wishes, travel times using the automobile are almost always much shorter than travel times using public transportation” (8). It doesn’t seem realistic to expect new lower density areas to increase their use in busses or other public transportation because the automobile will always be faster and more effective. Therefore, while “smart growth” is aiming in the right direction to building a healthier environment, the only effective thing to do is create an environmental policy that focuses on our

Commuting times only get worse regardless of how much development there is or how much “smart growth” thinks public transportation is the key to the future. American cities are heavily automobile dependant and always will be. You cannot have low-density areas with an effective public transportation system because their will not be enough demand for it, rather it will actually just contribute to the traffic congestion and pollution. The only fixable solution to our mode of transportation is to implement environmental policies that concentrate on better fuel sources. Not only do we have transportation to consider, but California cities also need policies that focus on the issues revolving environmental segregation. Limiting development on suburban fringes will hopefully encourage community development in central cities. It will repair rates of concentrated poverty and hopefully encourage further policies that promote a better quality of life for all community members. Everyone deserves an equal opportunity to live in decent housing and having the accessibility to get to work. However, public policies need to also include the disadvantaged when figuring out how to make a community better, rather than expanding