150 likes | 222 Views
Sprawl in Canada and the United States. The Inevitability Hypothesis: sprawl is inevitable in free society so we might as well accommodate it. Logic underlying the Inevitability Hypothesis. Assumption: The US has sprawl.
E N D
Sprawl in Canada and the United States • The Inevitability Hypothesis: sprawl is inevitable in free society so we might as well accommodate it.
Logic underlying the Inevitability Hypothesis • Assumption: The US has sprawl. • Assumption 2: Other countries, like Canada, have sprawl despite policies that are anti-sprawl. • Conclusion: Because even antisprawl countries like Canada have sprawl, sprawl is inevitable.
Is Assumption 2 right? • Based on 2 assumptions: • A) Canada sprawls as much as the US • B) Canadian policy is anti-sprawl. • MY PAPER QUESTIONS BOTH ASSUMPTIONS.
Do Canadian cities sprawl as much as American cities?Two ways to measure sprawl: where we grow, how we grow • WHERE WE GROW • Compared ten cities that were biggest in 1950 in each country. • In US, eight of ten lost population since 1950, usually by over 20 percent. • Canada hard to compare because of shifting census tract boundaries, until 1970.
Canadian cities within 1970 boundaries • USA: eight of ten still lost population; six lost over 20 percent between 1970 and 2000; median loss 24 percent. • Canada: only four lost population; biggest population loss (Montreal) 18 percent.
In other words.... • Canada’s WORST CASE SCENARIO (Montreal, 18 percent loss 1970-2000) is better than the USA MEDIAN (24 percent). • CONCLUSION: Canada sprawls less than USA.
How we grow • Canadian transit market share 14 percent • USA transit share 6 percent • Again, Canada’s worst case scenario among big cities (Calgary/Edmonton, 20-25 non auto market share) better than most American cities (e.g. Phoenix has only 11 percent non auto share, Jacksonville 8 percent, you get the idea) • SO CANADIAN CITIES LESS AUTO ORIENTED THAN USA.
Part 2: government regulation and sprawl • Canadian cities subsidize and regulate for sprawl just like USA.
Prosprawl regulation, example 1 • Highway spending- Canadian govt. Spends $20 b a year on highways only 4b on transit. • Highways subsidize suburbanization by making long commutes easier.
Prosprawl regulation, part 1 • Anti-density regulation: Canadian cities and suburbs mandate minimum lot sizes, height limits just like US cities. • Low density means fewer people can live within walking distance of public transit, shops etc.
But.... • Canadian cities may be less prosprawl than USA.Sample study: one inner and outer suburb of Toronto (Mississauga, Burlington), one inner and outer suburb of Atlanta (Sandy Springs and Alpharetta).
Comparison • Least compact single family zones: • Mississauga, Burlington ½ acre to 1 acre • Sandy Springs, Alpharetta 2-3 acres • Least compact multifamily zones • Mississauga/Burlington 18-25 stories • Sandy Springs 4 stories • Alpharetta only 10 units per care!
Prosprawl regulation part 2 • Minimum parking requirements- if you want to build apartments/business you must have a parking lot. • Degrades pedestrian environment because pedestrians have to walk across parking lots, makes parking easier and subsidizes driving, reduces density
Prosprawl regulation part 3 • Six to ten lane streets mean crossing street a life endangering adventure • True in Canadian cities like American- just look outside!
For more detail.... • Rough draft of my paper is at • http://works.bepress.com/lewyn/65/