Sprawl.
Remember sprawl? It seems as if the concept and practice of creating/perpetuating sprawl has fallen from the nation's conscious. Is this an indication that we have successfully lobbied against the agents of sprawl and defeated them through the creation of interconnected, pedestrian-friendly, integrated and environmentally-friendly communities?
I am fairly certain we all know the answer to that question.
Why is it then, that the prototypical form of suburban development, adopted shortly after the end of the World War II, has faded into the back of everyone's mind? The answer is simple; most people consider the economic and environmental impacts of sprawl to be insignificant in their daily lives.
Many Americans, especially in these trying economic times, are thankful to even own their own home and have the ability to make the mortgage payment, provide food for their family and own their own private automobile. As former President George W. Bush once said, "I believe part of a hopeful society is one in which somebody owns something." (Source: Third Presidential Debate, Tempe, Arizona, Oct. 13, 2004)
(Granted, home-ownership is a more sustainable form of housing, but I am not exactly sure that's what Dubya meant. And I understand that he's only been the "former-President" for about 24 hours, but it's been a long 8 years.)
Americans, at least a large portion of Americans, for some reason have yet to associate any intangible (or tangible for that matter) costs with the practice of sprawl. Why is that? The answer is simple; greenwashing.
While the national builders and their associated trade organizations will be the first to tell you that they are concerned with developing "communities" and building homes to address our housing needs, in reality they exist for one reason; to make a profit.
The most profitable way for a national builder to develop a community is to acquire "raw land" which in most cases is located away from city centers. The reason for this is simple, volume + low development cost = enormous profits.
It doesn't take a genius to understand that developing a parcel of land that used to be a farm is far less expensive than rehabilitating or adapting an urban structure for housing. More importantly, these builders are mainly concerned with how many homes they can build in the shortest period of time. (As an example, Pulte's Del Webb division requires a minimum potential of 3,000 units plus adequate acreage for a golf course in order to even consider purchasing a tract of land.)
But this is not the point of our exploration today. Admittedly, the effects of sprawl are widespread, numerous and often exhausting to contemplate; which is probably the major factor which has contributed to why we have seemingly "moved on" from being concerned with sprawl.
To simplify our discussion, we need to understand the hidden or intangible costs of sprawl. The most important of which are the added degradation of our overall health, the added expense associated with our transportation choices and the negative environmental impact that suburban developments in rural areas inflict upon the ecosystem.
Consider our national health.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that 12.4% of children age 2-5, 17% of children age 6-11 and 17.6% of children age 12-19 are obese. While the integration of high-fructose corn syrup into nearly every food product in our society has contributed to this alarming trend, the pervasion of suburban sprawl can be considered one of, if not the largest, contributing factor. Why you may ask? One of the Hyper-Capitalist driven strategies for developing profitable communities is to avoid building sidewalks.
Seems like a silly or insignificant element. But take a tour of any of the new developments in your immediate area and pay close attention to the design of many of the homes. You will notice that the most significant element of the facade is the garage. Simply think back to our discussion of our national transportation choices and we understand why the garage has become so significant in the design and construction of new homes.
In addition to our transportation choices, if we look at the national builder strategy of maximizing the number of potential units,we find that neighborhood parks take away the opportunity to build one more unit. Besides, Americans drive everywhere anyway, so there is no need for spaces that cost money to design, build and maintain without the Hyper-Capitalist benefit of profitability.
Our previous discussions of our national transportation choices eludes to the additional costs associated creating developments which are, in essence, disconnected from basic goods and services. In addition to these costs, increased automobile trips cost us something more important than money; time.
The time Americans spend commuting, obtaining goods and services from sources that are agents of sprawl themselves and working to maintain their primary mode of transportation leads to a disconnect with the landscape, the environment as a whole and with other members of our society. Consider this simple fact: Americans spend more time commuting to and from work (around 100 hours) than they do vacationing (around 80 hours). To further compound the issue, the average American forfeits 3 whole days of vacation per year!
The final cost, the added impact to the ecosystem and environment which sprawling developments exert on previously undeveloped land, contributes to a myriad of costs for our society.
The introduction of petroleum-based products into ecosystems that previously protected themselves naturally from a minimum amount of these products and by-products has had a widespread economic impact on our daily lives. Environmental clean-up programs, the degradation of our clean water supplies and the nitrification and destruction of our soils have led to costs that are increasing daily and will have a long-term impact that has yet to be realized.
Perhaps the main reason that the issue of sprawl has fallen to the wayside is that it can be exhausting. Our discussion today has barely scratched the surface of the overall effect that this practice has exerted on our culture and society.
It seems as if this discussion has also strayed from the original topic; greenwashing. Admittedly it has, only in the sense that we have yet to discuss how greenwashing is utilized in the continued pervasion of sprawl.
Considering the somewhat overwhelming evidence that we have presented today, we shall continue our exploration of the use of greenwashing in our next post.
Our settlement of land is without regard to the best use of land. -Arthur Erickson
Posts
