More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction and background on urban sprawl
Negative impacts of urban sprawl
Introduction and background on urban sprawl
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Susie Lee
World Regional Geography
GEO 105-176
Spring 2014 - Emelda Jones
Modern Urban Sprawl: A Brief Exploration of Three Associated Problems
The term "urban sprawl" seems to have several different meanings depending on the context, but it is very loosely defined as the movement of a human population from high-density communities towards lower-density communities. While this phenomenon is often cited as a manifestation of modern life, and occasionally an exclusively American problem, it actually has been a part of city life around the globe for longer than one would expect. In Robert Bruegmann's book, Sprawl: A Compact History, he notes that the wealthier residents of a city have always had a tendency to migrate towards the low-density outskirts of urban areas. For example, members of the Chinese nobility and upper-class during the Ming Dynasty would speak fondly of the benefits of living away from the cities. The idea of suburban areas goes back even farther, extending as far back as ancient Rome, where rulers and the wealthy lived in highly fashionable "villa suburbanas." This kind of evidence alone strongly suggests that urban sprawl is neither a recent phenomenon nor simply a product of American culture. Despite modern efforts to combat urban sprawl, its historical prevalence suggests that it may be unavoidable and may be a manifestation of the tendencies of human nature. However, the modern iteration of urban sprawl and its subsequent problems appear to be strongly correlated with the use of gasoline-powered personal automobiles. Three of these problems are increased air pollution, increased health problems, and increased incidence of severe injuries and fatalities.
Lower-density areas have a few characteristics in comm...
... middle of paper ...
...only a very small part of the extremely multifaceted phenomenon of urban sprawl. As previously mentioned, urban sprawl seems to be an inherent part of human community development and an issue that has always present worldwide. It seems highly unlikely that the phenomenon of urban sprawl itself can be eradicated from society. It may be a more realistic goal to attempt to change various aspects of society to decrease the effects of urban sprawl, which may require a dramatic paradigm shift for everyone in a society. It is impossible to correct a community problem if the members of that community are not even aware of the issues and the stakes at hand. Such an overreaching phenomenon such as urban sprawl will require acute awareness and enormous effort on the part of every individual in a community to make a marked difference on the negative effects of urban sprawl.
Gentrification is defined as the process by which the wealthy or upper middle class uproot poorer individuals through the renovation and rebuilding of poor neighborhoods. Many long-term residents find themselves no longer able to afford to live in an area, where the rent and property values are increasing. Gentrification is a very controversial topic, revealing both the positive and negative aspects of the process. Some of the more desirable outcomes include reduced crime rate, increased economic activity, and the building of new infrastructures. However, it is debated whether the negatives overwhelm the positive. An increase in the number of evictions of low-income families, often racial minorities can lead to a decline of diversity
The rezoning of 125th street has been a topic of controversy and has yet to be approved. The Department of City Planning believes rezoning of 125th street will bring positive economic changes. I personally believe that these changes would negatively affect the residents and business owners of Harlem. According to the New York City’s Planning Commission, the rezoning will bring new business and housing. Residents and business owners disagree because they believe this plays a bigger role in promoting further “gentrification.” I believe that Harlem should be able to keep its cultural heritage while still promoting and modifying economic growth.
This investigation is based on the assumption that gentrification with all its troubles can’t be prevented and is an inherent part of every city. What are the negative impacts of gentrification? What are the underlying mechanisms that feed these impacts? What drives these mechanisms? What would be an alternative scenario?
It started with a governmental incentive of getting America out of the Great Depression. Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) was “signed into law by FDR, designed to serve urban needs” (Jackson, 196). This law protected homeownership, not only that, “it introduced, perfected, and proved in practice the feasibility of the long-term, self-amortizing mortgage with uniform payments spread over the whole life of the debt” (Jackson, 196). Because of this new law, it was cheaper to buy a house than rent. Then came the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) that encouraged citizens to reside in new residential developments and/or areas with FHA-approved features, like Levittown. Mass-produced cars and cheap gasoline made the option of moving to a suburban area more of a reality for many families because now they can think to live such a lifestyle. With cars, come commuters who needs accessible roads to drive to and from work, to go grocery shopping, etc. which mean that the government need to pave roads for such commute to happen. “The urban expressways led to lower marginal transport costs and greatly stimulated deconcentration,” (Jackson, 191). As Jackson expressed, “The appeal of low-density living over time and across regional, class, and ethnic lines was so powerful that some observers came to regard it as natural and inevitable,” (190). Urban areas were becoming too crowded, too heterogeneous, more and more crimes were breaking out everyday; this is not an ideal living condition for a lot of people so moving to a bigger, more spread out area is a great contestant. Therefore, some of the key factors that explains the growth of the suburbs are housing policy (FHA & HOLC), mass-produced houses, mass-produced cars, cheap fuel, and government funding
to fund public programs or make general improvements throughout the community. Urban sprawl is expensive not only on people’s wallets, but is taxing on their health, the environment, their relationships. The.. After examining all of the problems associated with urban sprawl it is hard not to question how America lost the genuine communities of old and adopted the new community of
The modern story of developed areas is a move from the inner city to the suburbs. This decentralization of metropolitan areas has left urban areas neglected. Such a transformation has had negative consequences, because it has inherently meant the abandonment of those left behind in urban centers. Furthermore, the issue is complicated by the fact that the distinction between those moving to the suburbs and those left behind has been defined largely by race. As Kain notes,
Gentrification is the keystone for the progression of the basic standards of living in urban environments. A prerequisite for the advancement of urban areas is an improvement of housing, dining, and general social services. One of the most revered and illustrious examples of gentrification in an urban setting is New York City. New York City’s gentrification projects are seen as a model for gentrification for not only America, but also the rest of the world. Gentrification in an urban setting is much more complex and has deeper ramifications than seen at face value. With changes in housing, modifications to the quality of life in the surrounding area must be considered as well. Constant lifestyle changes in a community can push out life-time
There are many examples of cities reforming itself over time, one significant example is Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. More than a hundred years after the discovery of gold that drew thousands of migrants to Vancouver, the city has changed a lot, and so does one of its oldest community: Downtown Eastside. Began as a small town for workers that migrants frequently, after these workers moved away with all the money they have made, Downtown Eastside faced many hardships and changes. As a city, Vancouver gave much support to improve the area’s living quality and economics, known as a process called gentrification. But is this process really benefiting everyone living in Downtown Eastside? The answer is no. Gentrification towards DTES(Downtown Eastside) did not benefit the all the inhabitants of the area. Reasons are the new rent price of the area is much higher than before the gentrification, new businesses are not community-minded, and the old culture and lifestyle of the DTES is getting erased by the new residents.
Furthermore, both articles “Gentrification: A Positive Good For Communities” and. “The Deeper Problems We Miss When We Attack ‘Gentrification’” exhibit their opinion on the positives of gentrification and the potential of “revitalization” in low-income urban communities. Badger argues that gentrification brings nothing more than further opportunities for urban communities while integrating citizens of different social classes. Furthermore, she continues to question if gentrification is in fact the monster that brings the prior expressions against gentrification where she says “If poor neighborhoods have historically suffered from dire disinvestment, how can the remedy to that evil — outside money finally flowing in — be the problem, too?”(Badger) Stating that the funds generated from sources external that are brought into these communities can’t be problematic.
Despite general declining rates of morbidity and mortality in the United States over the past century, African-Americans still find themselves at a health disadvantage and account for more than 40% of diagnosed cases of chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, asthma, obesity and cancer . Studies within the fields of sociology and public health have directed their focus towards individual-level determinants of health such as socio-economic status and individual health behaviors. However, there has been insufficient attention to how and why place and neighborhood contribute to racial/ethnic health disparities. This analysis examines the health implication of racial segregation as a result of gentrification on African Americans, explores systems of segregation measurement, and proposes ways to move beyond traditional public health and health care approaches to impact relevant policy.
Gentrification is a highly important topic that has not only been occurring all over the United States, but especially closer than we may have thought. San Francisco is home to hundreds of thousands of people who have been a part of how amazing this city has become. San Francisco is one of the most visited places in the world with many of its famous landmarks, endless opportunities not only for daytime fun but also has an amazing nightlife that people cannot get enough of. People come for a great time and could not be done without the help of the people who have grown up to experience and love this city for what it truly is. The cost of living in such an important city has definitely had its affect of lower income San Francisco residents. For decades we have seen changes occurring in parts of San Francisco where minorities live. We have seen this in Chinatown, SOMA, Fillmore district, and especially the Mission district.
Gentrification does not follow traditional urban growth theory, which predicts ?the decline of inner city areas as monied classes move to the metropolitan fringe.? The traditional economic model of real estate says that wealthy people can choose their housing from the total city market (Schwirian 96). Once these people decide to live in the suburbs, the lower social classes move into the old homes of the upper class, essentially handing housing down the socioeconomic ladder. Gentrification is actually a reversal of this process. For a variety of reasons, many inner city areas are becoming more attractive to the wealthy, and they are selecting their housing in those areas (Schwirian 96). The problem is that now when the wealthy take over poor homes and renovate them, the poor cannot afford the housing that the wealthy have abandoned. Many researchers have argued whether gentrification has truly created problems in cities. I will analyze the arguments for and against gentrification by exploring the subject from both sides.
Of the many problems affecting urban communities, both locally and abroad, there is one issue in particular, that has been victimizing the impoverished within urban communities for nearly a century; that would be the problem of gentrification. Gentrification is a word used to describe the process by which urban communities are coerced into adopting improvements respective to housing, businesses, and general presentation. Usually hidden behind less abrasive, or less stigmatized terms such as; “urban renewal” or “community revitalization” what the process of gentrification attempts to do, is remove all undesirable elements from a particular community or neighborhood, in favor of commercial and residential enhancements designed to improve both the function and aesthetic appeal of that particular community. The purpose of this paper is to make the reader aware about the significance of process of gentrification and its underlying impact over the community and the community participation.
Sociologist … explained that open pattern of suburb is because of seeking environment free noise, dirt and overcrowding that are in the centre of cities. He gave examples of these cities as St. John’s wood, Richmond, Hampstead in London. Chestnut Hill and Germantown in Philadelphia. He added that suburban are only for the rich and high class. This plays into the hands of the critical perspectives that, “Cities are not so much the product of a quasi-natural “ecological” unfolding of social differentiation and succession, but of a dynamic of capital investment and disinvestment. City space is acted on primarily as a commodity that is bought and sold for profit, “(Little & McGivern, 2013, p.616).
Urbanization is the process of becoming a city or intensification of urban elements. Since modernization, the meaning of urbanization mostly became the transformation that a majority of population living in rural areas in the past changes to a majority living in urban areas. However, urbanization differs between the developed and developing world in terms of its cause and the level of its negative outcomes. Korea, as one of the developing countries, experienced what is called ‘ overurbanization,’ and it experienced a number of negative consequences of it, although it could achieve a great economic development by it. This paper examines how urbanization differs between the West and the rest of the world, the characteristics and process of urbanization in Korea, problems sprung from its extreme urbanization, and government policies coping with population distribution.