This document discusses the definition and measurement of urban sprawl. It begins with an overview of the origins of the term "sprawl" in the 1930s and its popularization in the 1950s. It then examines conflicting perspectives on sprawl and various definitions from different organizations. The document proposes defining sprawl based on eight dimensions: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, mixed-uses, and proximity. These dimensions can be quantified to objectively measure sprawl's characteristics in a given geographic area. The document concludes that defining sprawl objectively using land use characteristics can help planners make informed land use decisions.

1. Nathan Robinson MRP Candidate 2011 University of Massachusetts 16 November 2009 ‘Sprawl’: Understanding its Meaning and Application t0 Practice

2. Presentation Overview Why Should We Care Origins of ‘Sprawl’ Confounding Perspectives and Definitions ‘Sprawl’ defined Concluding Remarks

3. ‘Sprawl’ Why Should We Care? Loss of community spirit and values Less leisure time Traffic congestion and Commuting Over-crowded schools Higher taxes Adverse fiscal impacts on local governments Poor Health, obesity Ugly, monotonous suburban landscapes Loss of sense of place Loss of Habitat and Open Space Decline in Mass Transit Climate Change

4. ‘Sprawl’s’Origins One of the earliest uses of the word "sprawl" in reference to land use was in a 1937 speech by Earl Draper, planning director of the Tennessee Valley Authority. “Perhaps diffusion is too kind a word…In bursting its bounds, the city actually sprawled and made the country side ugly…uneconomic of services and doubtful of social value.” William Whyte popularized “sprawl” with his essay in the 1958 book, The Exploding Metropolis. “Sprawl is bad aesthetics: sprawl is bad economics.” Much of his analysis continues to frame the debate on “sprawl,” to the present day. Costs of Sprawl, 1974, Real Estate Research Corporation

5. ‘Sprawl’s’ Influence SMART Growth Social Scientists Environmentalists Public Health Professionals Planners/Municipal Officials Architects Developers Community Groups TransportationAdvocates

6. Confounding Perspectives on ‘Sprawl’ “As one person’s noise can be another person’s favorite musical expression, so too is one person’s sprawl another’s cherished neighborhood.” -Robert Bruegmann Sprawl: a compact History “Eighty-percent of everything built in America has been built in the last 50 years, and most of it is depressing, brutal, unhealthy and spiritually degrading…” James Howard Kunstler Geography of Nowhere

7. ‘Sprawl’ Definitions “Sprawl, simply refers to the low-density, residential development beyond a city’s limit.” THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION “Many people think sprawl is synonymous with suburbanization…Another way of characterizing this process is thinking of sprawl ‘as the transitional period between rural and urban land use.’ ” REASON PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE “…low-density, scattered, urban development without systematic large-scale or regional public land-use planning.” ROBERT BRUEGGMAN SPRAWL: A COMPACT HISTORY

8. ‘Sprawl’ Definitions cont. “Sprawl−scattered development that increases traffic, saps local resources and destroys open space.” THE SIERRA CLUB “Sprawling development eats up farms, meadows, and forests, turning them into strip malls and subdivisions that serve cars better than people.” NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL “dispersed, auto-dependent development outside of compact urban and village centers, along highways, and in rural countryside.” Vermont Forum on Sprawl

9. Sprawl≠ Suburb Propensity to equate sprawl with suburbs as a means for validation Suburbs not confined to the United States Historically, suburbs were reserved for the wealthy and something the common man aspired to. Over half the population lives in suburbs Lewis Mumford, early critic of sprawl, spoke highly of traditional, planned, inner ring suburbs.

10. ‘Sprawl’ Defined “Sprawl is a pattern of land use that exhibits low levels of some combination of eight distinct dimensions: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, nuclearity, mixed-uses and proximity.” -Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and Measuring an Elusive Concept Strengths Weaknesses Objective Ambiguity Land Use Characteristics Inaccessible Quantifiable

11. ‘Sprawl’ Defined Definition dimensions are consistent with the negative externalities associated with sprawl Density- Residential Units/Sq. Mile Continuity- Leapfrog, Fragmented Development Concentration- Open Space Protection, Infrastructure Costs Clustering- Urban Form/Design, Impervious Surfaces Centrality- Relationship to Central Business District Mixed-Uses-Spatial Mismatch, Congestion/Traffic Proximity- Distance Between Uses, Congestion/Traffic

12. ‘Sprawl’ Defined Definition dimensions can be operationalized tomeasure ‘sprawl’ over a defined geographic area. Allows us objectivity in measuring sprawl Identify characteristics that are strengths and weaknesses. i.e. municipal area could have high-density land use, but have a low score with respect to proximity to proximity and mixed-use. Conducive to Master Plan Development Incentive Strategies Flexibility: Different regions have different resource limitations, weighting, and creation of other objective dimensions, allow us to quantify sprawl.

13. ‘Sprawl’ Measured

14. Conclusion ‘Sprawl’ is a very controversial word has been influential in shaping the debate on development and growth management. Subjectivity has its benefits and costs ‘Sprawl’ is not all low-density residential development As planners we can use objective definitions to operationalize land use characteristics to help us make rationale and informed land use decisions.