Is Sprawl An American Problem?

[Subdude]

Suburban Despair

Is urban sprawl really an American menace?

By Witold Rybczynski

Posted Monday, Nov. 7, 2005, at 6:42 PM ET

We hate sprawl. It's responsible for everything that we don't like about modern American life: strip malls, McMansions, big-box stores, the loss of favorite countryside, the decline of downtowns, traffic congestion, SUVs, high gas consumption, dependence on foreign oil, the Iraq war. No doubt about it, sprawl is bad, American bad. Like expanding waistlines, it's touted around the world as yet another symptom of our profligacy and wastefulness as a nation. Or, as Robert Bruegmann puts it in his new book, "cities that sprawl and, by implication, the citizens living in them, are self indulgent and undisciplined."

Or not. In Sprawl, cheekily subtitled "A Compact History," Bruegmann, a professor of art history at the University of Illinois at Chicago, examines the assumptions that underpin most people's strongly held convictions about sprawl. His conclusions are unexpected. To begin with, he finds that urban sprawl is not a recent phenomenon: It has been a feature of city life since the earliest times. The urban rich have always sought the pleasures of living in low-density residential neighborhoods on the outskirts of cities. As long ago as the Ming dynasty in the 14th century, the Chinese gentry sang the praises of the exurban life, and the rustic villa suburbana was a common feature of ancient Rome. Pliny's maritime villa was 17 miles from the city, and many fashionable Roman villa districts such as Tusculum

[editor]

I'm not sure why Slate was so surprised that there are places other than America that have suburbs and sprawl. I guess they're afflicted with the American self-loathing that seems to be going around and assume that all things American are bad. There have been suburbs and sprawl in England for decades, if not centuries. I've seen it from Budapest to Salzburg to Paris. Heck, anyone who's read the 1932 novel "The Good Earth" knows that these sorts of things never change. It's stupid of Slate to assume that we, as Americans, are shocked to find out things are the same all over. Unless it's me who is not in touch with mainstream America (more and more likely these days).

[Montrose1100]

Dude, its not cool to hate America anymore, get a life... (Witold Rybczynski)

[RedScare]

Dude, its not cool to hate America anymore, get a life... (Witold Rybczynski)

Someone forgot to tell these people.

Oh, wait. They're mad at Bush, not America.

[lockmat]

Or not. In Sprawl, cheekily subtitled "A Compact History," Bruegmann, a professor of art history at the University of Illinois at Chicago, examines the assumptions that underpin most people's strongly held convictions about sprawl. His conclusions are unexpected. To begin with, he finds that urban sprawl is not a recent phenomenon: It has been a feature of city life since the earliest times. The urban rich have always sought the pleasures of living in low-density residential neighborhoods on the outskirts of cities. As long ago as the Ming dynasty in the 14th century, the Chinese gentry sang the praises of the exurban life, and the rustic villa suburbana was a common feature of ancient Rome. Pliny's maritime villa was 17 miles from the city, and many fashionable Roman villa districts such as Tusculum

[musicman]

I believe/hope that Houston in the next 15-30 years will have more OPTIONS than most cities.

interesting comment for someone who lives in the woodlands.

Edited December 27, 2007 by musicman

[Vertigo58]

Wow! Very old topic 2005? Whad up y'all?

Cities will sprawl no matter what. It's inevitable, we just have to grin and bear it. Population explosion. Just make a toast and pretend its not happening.

[lockmat]

interesting comment for someone who lives in the woodlands.

What do you mean?

[N Judah]

Well, the causes of sprawl now-vs.-then are different...dunno if anyone cares about that.

[TheNiche]

Well, the causes of sprawl now-vs.-then are different...dunno if anyone cares about that.

Yeah, the old model of sprawl based around the monocentric city began to slowly decay in about the 1920's and was all but eliminated within 50 years. The polycentric model currently reigns, but is not without challengers. It could either open up with telecommuting or become much more compact to reflect an energy crisis.

I expect the former, but project that it'll take just long a transition period to make telecommuting the dominant form. I don't anticipate that energy costs will be a big long-term determinant of urban form.