Urban Sprawl, Inner City Growth, And Suburban Developments

Urban growth is described as the increase in the number of people who live in towns and cities and suburbanisation can be defined as the outward growth of urban development.

Urban sprawl is a concept that describes the spread of human populations from the major cities or urban areas into the low-density rural communities. Several factors are attributed to cause urban sprawl, such as lower land rates in rural areas, improved infrastructure, lack of effective urban planning, rise of population growth in the cities, and consumer preferences among others. Urban sprawl is considered to present significant benefits to individuals. For example, access of cheap land, better school systems in the suburbs, low crime rates and a sense of community. However, urban sprawl is considered undesirable due to factors like increasing the level of public expenditure in the development of infrastructure, increased health problems due to the spread of pollution, environmental degradation, and increased traffic in cities among others. This paper examines the concept of urban sprawl in the developing cities like the City of Edmonton, focusing on the policies that could be implemented to enhance population in the city and minimize the events of urban sprawl.

Making sure that there are enough jobs in the region to sustain the needs of urban growth in a growing population.

The third listing for the definition of sprawl in the Merriam-Webster’s dictionary is as follows: “to spread or develop irregularly”. Unfortunately, this is the pattern, or lack thereof, with which America’s development is following. Every single day the world population rises, and these new babies have to live somewhere. Due to the fact that the birth rate is larger than that of the death rate in America (http://www.bartleby.com/151/a24.html), new homes and communities must be developed to accommodate all of the incoming people. This fundamental concept is coupled by another very powerful driving force prompting people to live in the suburbs of America, and that is greed. The economy makes

Before diving into the relevant action steps, it is important to understand the history that led to this crisis. Thompson (2010), states that after World War II, cities were highly valued and popular until conflict, poverty, and distress led to the demise of these cities; thus increasing the value of suburban

Through the creation of suburban neighborhoods middle class families have been able to achieve upward mobility. With the creation of suburban neighborhoods in the 1950’s it gave families the opportunities to go out and buy their little piece of the American Dream. The time of poverty from the Great Depression was over as was the second World War and then it was a time that the American Dream was well within reach. However with this outward expansion, for those who could not afford to leave, it also brought about a higher crime rate, as well as lower educational standards in the people living in the inner cities. Today suburban neighborhoods can be seen to have many different stereotypes in the media as well. Suburbia, when it was born

In Robert Bruegmann article “How Sprawl Got a Bad Name,” he is the odd man out and is for sprawling. One of his reasons throughout is that all the architectures plan for preventing the problem has failed. Bruegmann shows his argument that the economy has these set of expectations for today’s society. The citizens are not really thinking realistically when it comes to those modern expectations. He backs up his point by stating a big crisis of traffic in Los Angeles and how it is not the congestion it is that the programs sit in place are outdated. One of the more convincing reasons of why Bruegmann is supporting sprawl is “that growing numbers of people have discovered that it is the surest way to obtain the rich, satisfying

The industrial element of cities that the rich population ran from in the early part of the 20th century is gone thus the same population in essence is moving back to the suburbs. The violence that once riddled the cities has been in a downward trend which also induces demographic inversion. Walkability is something that is now valued by the middle class who are ditching there long commutes for the sidewalks of the inner city. Lastly the populations whom once found themselves with four walls, a lawn and picket fence have more earning ability and a deeper pocket of savings which is now ground for living in the city. The fundamental truth to all of this is, according to Ehrenhalt, “If some people are coming inside, some people have to be going out” and, the minorities are moving out and the majorities are moving in.

The significance of the suburbs for the development of the United States was crucial in the 1950s. In the 1950s the US was the strongest nation because it was able to thrive in its economy and military powers. Because of the thrive of economy people were able to buy cars and houses outside of the city. Since they had transportation outside of the city. People moved to the outskirts of the city because they had a lot of babies. After world war two was over a lot of Americans had children because of they were happy to find peace and believed that it would last. This era Americans had more employments and the wages were

The convenience of living in an urban or suburban neighborhood can be appealing to many people. Choosing between areas can sometimes be overwhelming for some individual. People are not only concerned about the safety of a community, but they are also concerned about the environment. Although some neighborhoods might look attractive, people should consider the expense that comes with it, and how commuting will affect them in the long run. Nevertheless, both neighborhoods have their specific advantages and disadvantages. When choosing between an urban or suburban neighborhood, it is important for people to research the community, the expense, and convenience

As a process, gentrification has had both a negative and positive impact on the society as well as affected the economic status of the involved countries or towns. As a way

Burgess’s concentric zone theory was presented in 1924. He presented a descriptive urban land use model that divided cities in a set of concentric circles expanding from downtown to the suburbs. His representation came from Burgess’ observations of various American cities, especially Chicago. Burgess model assumes a relationship between the socio-economic status of households and the distance from the Central Business District. The further from the district, the better the quality of housing, but the longer the commuting time. Making this Accessing better housing is done at the expense of longer commuting times and costs as well. According to Burgess, urban growth is a process of expansion and reconversion of land uses, with a tendency of each inner zone to expand in the outer zone. According to Burgess’ theory, a large city is divided in six concentric zones, Burgess’s model has its cons according to critics. It is said to be a product of its time. That is, it won’t work the same with present cities. The model was developed when American cities were growing very fast and when motorized transportation was still uncommon as most people used public transit. Thus the concept cannot be applied to those from the second half to the twentieth century where highways have enabled urban development to escape the reconversion process and to take place directly in the suburbs. The model in this case was developed for American cities and is limited elsewhere.

Smart growth is choosing a better way for communities and cities to grow without hurting the environment. “For example, the recently emerged concept smart growth is inviting communities and metropolitan areas to address sprawl and purposely choose to develop in more environmentally sustainable ways. The concept recognizes that growth will occur and focuses on economic, environmental,

New Urbanism, a burgeoning genre of architecture and city planning, is a movement that has come about only in the past decade. This movement is a response to the proliferation of conventional suburban development (CSD), the most popular form of suburban expansion that has taken place since World War II. Wrote Robert Steuteville, "Lacking a town center or pedestrian scale, CSD spreads out to consume large areas of countryside even as population grows relatively slowly. Automobile use per capita has soared, because a motor vehicle is required for nearly all human transportation"1. New Urbanism, therefore, represents the converse of this planning ideology. It stresses traditional planning, including multi-purpose zoning,

An emerging issue is that of urban sprawl. While some aspects of urban sprawl has been seen since ancient times, this phenomenon has started gaining the most momentum in the past century, aided by the advancement of technology, especially with the rise of mass produced automobiles, houses and highway systems. Many people unknowingly contribute to this environmental problem, as is the nature of it. Urban sprawl deals with the growth of the suburbs, the area between the urban and rural areas of a city. Most of America’s largest cities and states, in terms of population, are prime examples of urban sprawl. Opponents of urban sprawl usually cite the government as a major cause of sprawl. The government may be a major catalyst of