Urban Form, Urban Sprawl, And Smart Growth

I was charged with the immense task of writing an executive summary on the state of our nation in regards to urbanization. Though this is a large and some may say difficult task I am surely up for the challenge. Outsiders looking in on the United States may say that though the U.S has a few problems, for the most part, it is doing well as a country. I argue against that, though compared to other countries it may seem that it is safer with a well-organized government that is just a facade. Though on the "outside" America may seem like it a pleasant place the only thing separating it from many third world countries is our government and big businesses. Aside from that America can be compared to the Wild West with it is massive amounts of violence

The term ‘gentrification’ has myriads of interpretations from different geographers, and sociologists. Ever since, there has been protracted debate on its methodology, consequences and whether it constitutes a dominant or residual urban form. The term ‘gentrification’ was first coined by the Marxist urban geographer Ruth Glass (Glass, 1964) to describe the influx of wealthier individuals into cities or neighbourhoods who replace working or lower-classes already living there by using London districts such as Islington as her example. On the other hand, Smith and Williams (1986, p.1) define gentrification as “the rehabilitation of working class and derelict housing and the consequent transformation

People in the city generally have much different ways of living and worldviews than people in the country. Adherence to rural customs may begin to slacken, groups of acquaintances and

The city experienced a high influx of people and a speedy development. The once urban settlement soon became a beautiful town. People bought and built houses. Shopping malls were erected. Due to the large population, various social amenities were also in place.

This paper is a review of past and current research based on the cause and effect of urban sprawl in the United States with a case analysis of Fairfax County, Virginia. The motivation for this review is to shed light on issues that surround urban sprawl in large metropolitan areas and to discuss recommendations for research and ways to improve various effects of sprawl. The second motivation for this research is to show that there needs to be uniformity among researchers and urban planners, better data and analysis should be done to combat sprawl. My goal with this literature review is to define urban sprawl, define classic patterns in the United States, how we measure sprawl, the cause and effect of sprawl in the United States, give detailed background information on Fairfax County, future trends and implications of sprawl in Fairfax County, how to combat sprawl in the United States as well as in Fairfax County and key priorities in future research.

In recent years, the rapid expansion of metropolitan areas has been termed “urban sprawl,” which refers to a complex pattern of land use, transportation, and social and economic development. The broad phenomenon of sprawl is a variety of issues related to land use, transportation, urban and regional

Step one: I will refine and update the Ewing et al. (2002) metropolitan sprawl indices to 2010This study will differ from the Ewing et al.’s 2002study in three respects. First, it will include additional metrics from various data sources such as Walk Score, NAVTEQ road data, Smart Location Databases and National Land Cover Database in order to increase validity and captures more aspects of each four dimensions (development density, land use mix, activity centering and street accessibility).

People immigrated and traveled to cities for the increase of money and job from what they were making from farming. The factory work had appeared and seemed to be less strenuous than the farming work, and they looked forward to a better income and money and most satisfying lifestyle.

Currently, policymakers are mostly concerned with the economic impacts a policy will have. While economic factors are important when evaluating and analyzing policies, there needs to be more of an emphasis on the social impacts policies have, especially when it comes to community development policies. Although it is not the only issue with currently popular community development policies, gentrification is one of the most problematic and enlightening conflicts of our time. The core issue with gentrification is it does not benefit the people who are most marginalized in the city. One can argue it improves neighborhoods by bringing business development, improving housing, and increasing median incomes, but these benefits do nothing to help the

Gentrification is most easily understood as occurring in various stages. During the 1950s, 60s and 70s, public subsidies and “urban renewal” altered many large cities as sporadic reinvestment battled increasing flight from the inner city to the suburbs. The second significant surge occurred in the post-recession 1970s, encouraged by public-private partnerships and assimilation into national and global economic and cultural developments. At last, in the 1990s, gentrification swelled with rising urban housing markets and increasing capital investment.

Development in any city is a good idea that is sometimes handled in a bad way. This often-quick development leads to gentrification. Living in the Bay Area residents notice the changes in the city both large and small ways. Changes such as childhood businesses closing or losing the recognition of a place they have grown up living in. San Francisco, in particular, has become at risk to gentrification in different districts causing lower income or even middle-class residents to struggle to pay rising rent costs. The rise in rent is not only seen in San Francisco but other cities in the Bay Area such as South San Francisco.

Generally, well-planned sprawl or smart growth is a good thing and will result in fewer acres of rural land being covered by urban development. Environmentalists for example are interested in the urban planning aspects of anti-sprawl work because they can reduce the amount of energy used and pollution produced by residents. Also better planned sprawl is likely to keep residents happier and less likely to decide later to move even farther beyond the urban centers. The main issue of this paper is that the urban expansion of rural land loss is also significant to the quality of life of urban dwellers. The larger the urban area, the more difficult it will be for the average resident to reach the open spaces beyond the urban perimeter. The increase in urban distances can also effect

This migration flow contributed to rapid urban growth, population concentration, and territorial expansion of these large cities. This process took place in relatively large cities with a significant consumer market together with a relatively good infrastructure and equipment.

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

The main aim of the study is to investigate the effect of rural-urban migration on four district of North West province.