Much has been written on how the introduction of the interstate highway system in America in the 1950s induces sprawl development. In fact the interstate highway system was constructed in part to secure the country's defense capacity. The city of Northampton has an unofficial policy, one might call it a practice, of constructing zero new access roadways because it is thought these roads induce sprawl. One could argue that the introduction of electricity, sewer lines, postal delivery and high speed internet access also serve to induce sprawl. To counter sprawl Northampton has undertaken a fairly ambitious and some would say laudable effort to increase the number of, "smart roads," in the city known as bike paths or linear parks. Basically the only new roads created in Northampton are the roads that service new subdivisions, thus as the number of housing units increases both in and outside of the city, commuters are spending collectively an ever increasing amount of time sitting in queues at traffic lights, burning up gas in the process, while they navigate serpentine routes to reach their destinations.
Case in point, the other morning at around nine o'clock I sat through three or four light cycles at the Bridge Road-King Street-Damon Road intersection as I headed east on Bridge Road. I was standing (parked) on the hill and counted about twenty-five autos in front of me and about fifteen more behind me, though counting those behind me was a pesky task undertaken through my rearview mirrors. When the traffic light turned green I observed one car entering the line from D'Angelo's, one was let in from the CVS driveway, one from the car dealership on the opposite side of the road and one entered the line from the Hampshire Heights housing complex. In all I moved up about a half dozen car lengths during the duration of one green light and then waited again for the next one in order to move forward in what is known as the hurry up and wait mode of travel. My only other option to get where I was going was to cut through Jackson Street to either Barrett Street or Prospect Street at the Jackson Street light. I might have taken that option if I could have seen into the future, but I still would have been zig-zagging around. The late urban legend Jane Jacobs wrote on the importance of easy access in making cities desirable places to live, and I agree for what it's worth.
Possibly contributing to the sprawl dilemma, there is a movement afoot to bring high speed internet access to the rural areas of Massachusetts, areas where there is little population density. These areas have been spurned technologically speaking by the private sector for the most part because extending high speed internet access in these locations is not profitable. Thus some citizens are looking for government to subsidize the service, spreading the costs among all of the state's taxpayers. Though there are many benefits that this access could bring as outlined above in the video, an unintended consequence of completing this mission in Massachusetts however could be new sprawl development. Not unlike other forms of infrastructure the, "build it and they will come," axiom may hold true here. Once high speed internet access is provided in the hinterlands of the region, there will be one less reason for people and/or businesses to locate in the already built up urban areas of the state.
There are other views on sprawl. Robert W. Wassmer published an article on the topic in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 27, No. 3, 536-555 (summer 2008), entitled, “Causes of Urban Sprawl in the United State: Auto Reliance as Compared to Natural Evolution, Flight from Blight, and Local Revenue Reliance.” Interestingly Wassmer’s analysis found among other things that a ten percent reduction in the percentage of households owning one or more autos would reduce the square mile size of an urban area by only 0.5 percent and raise its population density by only 0.7 percent. He added that a ten percent reduction in per capita income would reduce the square mile size of an urban area by 11.4 percent and raise its population density by 10.1 percent. From his research he concludes that, “feasible reductions in auto reliance will have very little impact on the magnitude of urban decentralization in the U.S.” and further adds that, “Where this all leads in regard to implications for policy makers intent on using public policy to reduce sprawl is greater consideration of direct regulations and planning interventions into setting the overall boundary of developable land in an urban area.” And finally, “…automobile reliance in a U.S. urban area will decline when sprawl declines” and not the other way around.
Basically Wassmer is asserting that once income levels decline people will begin to move back to urban cores. Though some would see this as a calamity he is also suggesting in a roundabout way that municipalities create urban growth boundaries to codify where future growth can occur. His point is clear, merely getting people out of their automobiles will not significantly reduce sprawl as some assert. In short, the notion that building bike paths will have a significant impact on sprawl is not supported by Wassmer's evidence, though I'm sure other researchers would disagree.
There is some common sense evidence available to support Wassmer's first assertion however. One need only examine the consequences of the gas price spikes in July 2008 when a gallon sold for more than $4 in the U.S. In general, the spike in prices lowered the amount of disposable income available for people which resulted in increases in both transit use and car pooling and a lowered demand in the U.S. for oil. Once this happened the price per barrel also dropped due to the oil glut. It seems logical to assume that if the public transit/car pool trends continue, despite the drop in gas prices, people will also gravitate toward the urban centers and their places of employ so as to reduce both commuting time and gas expenditures and to restore their disposable income. Thus a higher value will be placed on living near social amenities and commerce centers and sprawl development will be reduced. If this holds true, the increased use of bicycles may be the result, but not necessarily the cause of the inward migration to urban core areas and the increased bike path capacity in the city of Northampton will be there to welcome those that make this choice.
As to Wassmer's second point according to Demographia, Portland, OR has shown mixed results in reducing sprawl by instituting an urban growth boundary and some argue that the boundary has increased the unaffordability of Portland housing and caused leapfrog development outside of the boundary. You can read the four page article from Demographia, "Portland Growth Boundary Keeps Out Growth," here (PDF).
