The Effects of Urban Sprawl in New York City - Coursework Example

Assess the Effects of Urban Sprawl

Definition

According to Squires (2002), urban sprawl is the spread of urban settlements into neighboring areas without any control. It involves a rapid expansion of the geographic boundaries of a town to the nearby areas that have low-density residential housing. A common feature of urban sprawl is single-use zoning and high reliance on private automobiles for transportation purposes. Besides, the need to provide accommodation for the rising urban population leads to urban sprawl (Squires, 2002). Therefore, urban sprawl is a trending problem in the main towns whereby settlements are expanding from the areas that surround the urban center to low-density neighborhoods.

Urban Sprawl in New York City

Urban sprawl is a menace that is facing all cities in the United States, and New York City is not exceptional. Recently, there have been expansions of settlements from the residential boundaries of cities to neighborhoods that were unoccupied (Harvey, 2008). The trend is leading to declining of downtowns and loss of favorite countryside where urban residents would go and relax during their free time. The neighborhoods are now occupied by malls, mansions and big stores which are making the areas to lose their natural appearance. Planners and environmental policy makers are terming the trend as wastefulness on potentials of those areas.

The urban sprawl situation in New York City is worsening every day. The settlement into neighborhoods of the town are increasing, and there is an anticipation that the neighborhoods will have a high population in the future. The United States Metropolitan Statistical department ranks the sprawl index score of New York City at 203.40. New York’s sprawl index ranks highest among the ten U.S cities in the ranking. Hence, implying that New York City is the densest city in the U.S. The profound change in urban sprawl in New York City has been witnessed since 2000. For instance, growth in the New York Metropolitan Area brought an addition of 700,000 residents in the region between 2000 and 2010 (Flatt, 2010).

The rapid expansion in New York is attributable to employment interchange between counties in the central area of the city and counties outside the metropolitan area. Harvey (2008), stipulates that many people are moving to the suburbs of New York City every year. The movements of people from the urban boundaries of New York City are evident in the population statistics of 2005. The statistics indicate that population in the metropolitan area of New York City was more than people in the city itself. Specifically, the population of New York City was 8.5 million while that of the entire metropolitan area was 18 million inhabitants (Harvey, 2008). Further, there are positive changes in the infrastructure and commercial activities in the metropolitan areas of New York City.

Bad Planning Decisions Which Contributed to Sprawl in New York City

Poor planning decisions is a primary contributing factor towards sprawling in the New York City. It is notable that planners of New York City did the task in isolation without consulting the key stakeholders in the town and the neighboring communities (Gurin, 2003). There were poor plans on future developments of the town. The developments lack sustainability which is essential for any development activity in the New York City. Poor decisions in the planning of New York City imply that the neighborhoods of New York City have to pay for the expansion of New York City. In fact, it seems difficult for the neighborhoods to provide a linkage between the upcoming infrastructural developments and the existing infrastructure due to mistakes that were committed when developing the urban plan for New York City.

The decision to release information the Staten Island in the East Shore neighborhood is unimpressive. Resnik (2010), notes that availability of information on the area made it prone to encroachment and settlement. It is notable that the report on the status of Staten Island exposed the area to many people (Resnik, 2010). Further, adequate considerations were lacking in the decision to implement the Long Island Expressway refurbishment project which was starting from the Cross Island Parkway to Nassau County (Gurin, 2003). The inadequacy of the decision is evident in the fact that the project lacked high-occupancy-vehicle lane that would bring ease when commuting through the area using vehicles.

Hevesi (2004), reveals that there were poor decisions when planning for expansion into neighborhoods of New York City. Planners in the department of planning failed to embrace prudence and sustainability when a plan for expansion to the suburbs of New York. The officials in the department permitted the developers to advance without considering the potential adverse effects such as urban sprawling. Moreover, there were numerous approvals on land use applications in the neighborhood of New York City (Hevesi, 2004).

Spillover Effects of Urban Sprawl in New York City

The first spill-over effects are on the health of residents due to changes in lifestyle. According to Ewing et al. (2008), the long distance from the city center makes people rely on cars which reduce the exercise that people do. Hence, increasing their risk of contracting lifestyle diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity. Besides, the long distance from the town center tends to exclude low-class people from opportunities in the city since they cannot afford to get a private car that would enable them to commute on a daily basis (Tam-Scott, 2008).

Adverse effects on the environment is another spillover effect. Polidoro, De Lollo, and Barros (2012) assert that urban sprawl leads to loss of land, habitat, and reduction in biodiversity which play a critical role in maintaining equilibrium in the environment. Additionally, urban sprawl disrupts the native plants and animals in the environment and substitutes them with invasive plants. Also, it is notable that sprawl increases pavements and covered surfaces which cannot absorb runoff. The failure to absorb runoff imply an increase in pollutants that enter water bodies such as rivers and lakes (Polidoro, De Lollo, and Barros, 2012). Consequently, the practice endangers biodiversity and the entire ecosystem.

Safety is another spillover effect due to the high reliance on automobiles. There are many vehicle crashes, injuries by the pedestrians, and pollution on the air. Previous data reveal that car crashes are the leading causes of death among the residents of New York City between age five and twenty-five (Squires, 2002). Furthermore, urban sprawl is carrying the blame for the deteriorating social relationships among the residents of New York City. In fact, urban sprawl creates barriers on close neighborhoods because people get minimal opportunities for socializing (Tam-Scott, 2008). It is amazing that sprawl substitutes public spaces with private spaces such as fenced backyards. Another spill-over effect is evident in the increase of public expenditure. The state government and federal government incur extra expenses in the provision of public utilities to cater for dispersed population (Squires, 2002). As a result, there are increases in costs for communities and the taxpayers who are the source of public funds.

Urban sprawl present challenges in urban planning and regional planning. The planners experience difficulties in dealing with uncontrolled expansion and settlements in neighborhoods. The key features of urban sprawl make it difficult for the urban planners and regional planners to accomplish their work effectively. For instance, urban sprawl encourages high activity in cities and their neighborhoods, high residential density, and a variety of residence at neighborhood level which bring difficulties when undertaking planning (Polidoro, De Lollo & Barros, 2012). In fact, the high residential density even brings problems in accessing between one region and another. Thus, it becomes difficult for the regional planners to plan for the possibility of future expansion in the area. Polidoro, De Lollo and Barros (2012), add that it is difficult for urban planners to control settlements in urban areas due to dispersed settlements which lead to dispersed urbanization. Therefore, the urban planners and regional planners are unable to make explicit distinctions on land use separation due to the scarce location of residential, commercial, and residential structures.

Ethical Dilemmas

The planners and policy makers experience ethical dilemmas in their efforts to regulate urban sprawl in New York and the resultant spillovers. According to Tam-Scott (2008), there is an ethical dilemma on management relationships whereby the planners and policy makers experience tension between their values and the values of key stakeholders in the urban planning process. For example, the planners and decision makers experience ethical dilemma when they present professional advice which ends up being overturned or modified, despite meeting all the requirements (Tam-Scott, 2008).

Another moral dilemma is the conflict of interest in urban planning and policy making process. Polidoro, De Lollo and Barros (2012) hold that stakeholders have personal interests which they seek fulfillment. For instance, the values of a planner could be compromised by their friends who are seeking advice on an application for development. These people end up pressurizing the planners and policy makers to approve their request (Polidoro, De Lollo & Barros, 2012). Weak policy makers and planners find themselves compromising their values due to the pressure. Relationship management is an ethical dilemma that planners and policy makers face in the endeavor to manage spillovers resulting from urban sprawl. The professionals experience challenges on managing relationships with developers and stakeholders in the community (Polidoro, De Lollo & Barros, 2012). For example, it is hard for planners to deal with local councilors since they bring their values rather than maintaining a sole focus on the planning issues ahead.

Economic Dilemmas

The rising economic disparity arising from urban sprawl put the planners and policy makers in an economic dilemma when regulating the spill-over effects. Squires (2002), stipulate that planners experience difficulties when making critical decisions on the situation due to the division between low class and high-class people. Individuals in the low class stay near the town while people in middle and high class move to suburbs of the city. Thus, planners and policy makers experience difficulties due to the economic disparity and stratification. It is hard for the decision makers to stipulate on development programs due to residential differences among the people (Wolf-Powers, 2005). Consequently, planners are unable to plan the future directions of expansion since it is rapid and uncontrolled while policy makers experience funding problems in their efforts to provide public utilities.

Wolf-Powers (2005), stipulates that planners experience economic dilemmas when directing and controlling the adverse economic effects of urban sprawling. The adverse economic effects are attributable to the changing price levels on the property which imply that it is challenging for the planners to predict on the expected levies from the upcoming properties and establishments. On the other hand, the policy makers experience difficulties in assessing the economic effects of urban sprawling on certain zones (Wolf-Powers, 2005). Therefore, it was difficult to formulate policies on sustainable development, environment protection, and the competitiveness of New York City. Therefore, policy makers are unable to make sustainable policies on economic productivity of the city, quality of life, and governance issues in the town.

Policy Dilemmas

Planners and policy makers experience policy dilemmas when stipulating suitable policies to curb the menace of urban sprawl in the New York City. Local government authorities in the city tend to disregard policy recommendations from the planners and policy makers. The government officials only focus on tax revenue increase while ignoring the adverse effects that arise from sprawling of the city (Squires, 2002). The situation leaves the policy makers with the option of abiding by the requirements of local governments without caring about regional concerns.

Governance of the New York City presents policy dilemmas among the policy makers. It is notable that the task of land use planning and control in the New York City is given to the municipality (Gurin, 2003). New York City operates a complex local government structure that is irrelevant to the current planning and policy making standards since people many people live and work in metropolitan areas. For instance, all the land use planning and regulation in New York City takes place at the municipal level (Squires, 2002). Thus, policy makers and planners have little powers on the issue of land use planning and control. It becomes difficult for the policy makers and planners to develop sustainable regional solutions for the urban sprawl problem in the city since they operate under the authority of the municipality.

The current laws promote policy dilemmas among planners and policy makers. It notable that laws and regulations influence the land use and development policies that are developed planners and policy makers. On the same note, the planners and policy makers cannot contravene the set laws and regulations. It would be important to change some laws since they put the planners in a policy dilemma that lead to urban sprawl. For example, zoning laws that hinder commercial development in residential areas sprawl since residents have to move long distances to do shopping (Squires, 2002). Similarly, laws that allow for housing construction on rural land put the policy makers in a policy dilemma because they cannot stipulate policies for preventing development outside a defined urban area.

Future Concerns on Economic Policy Dilemmas and Urban Planning

There is anticipation that policy makers and planners will develop measures that will integrate economic disparity arising from urban sprawl. In that manner, they will ease any difficulties when making critical economic decisions to handle urban sprawl. Thus, they will formulate development policies that integrate the needs of people in different residential areas of the town. Further, it is predictable that policy makers will formulate sustainable policies on economic productivity of New York City. The sustainable policies will be attainable by implementing measures to control adverse economic effects such as changing price levels (Haas, 2008). Thus, it will be easy for the planners to make predictions on expected levies from upcoming properties and establishments.

Transfer of development rights is a key future prediction for urban planning. The measure will be essential in preserving the neighborhoods of the New York City from uncontrolled settlements. It will entail the exchange of right to develop properties with the ability to develop land in a target area. Besides, there is the option of sale of development rights. Secondly, urban planning of New York City will be incorporating evolutionary and dynamic aspects to keep up with current trends in urban planning (Haas, 2008). Therefore, urban planning in the city will be endorsing market-oriented principles to enhance in recognizing the role of markets in the allocation of land.

Conclusively, urban sprawl is a critical menace affecting the New York City. There is a rapid expansion of the city’s geographic boundaries to neighboring areas. Neighborhoods of New York City are now occupied by malls, mansions and big stores which are making the areas to lose their natural appearance. The United States Metropolitan Statistical department ranks the sprawl index score of New York City at 203.40. Bad decisions are the driving factor towards sprawling in New York City. Consequently, the practice has led to spill-over effects on health, environment, safety, and deterioration of social relationships. Moreover, it is clear that planners and policy makers experience ethical, economic, and policy dilemmas in their effort to regulate spillovers and sprawl in the city. The paper concludes by highlighting the future concerns on economic policy dilemmas and urban planning.