The True Cost of Sprawl: How is this justified?

yawn. Don't they have somewhere in Chicago you can spew this stuff?

Great article, thanks for sharing. Hopefully Buffalo's urban development departments read and utilizes the research.

If you want to see the actual effects of sprawl on a city, come to Philadelphia. The infrastructure in and out of the city (76, 95, 676, the regional rails, etc) completely inadequate for the number of people that need to get in and out of the city.

That catches the future 'mixed use' buildings in a rather tough spot. The land is extremely expensive and the population required to support it is becoming increasingly isolated in outer areas. That being said, it definitely seems to be the direction most developers are heading.

I'm not sure this cost v output idea has much weight in an area like buffalo though, where land is so cheap and the population is accustomed to driving.

Let's see. Today, Mom or Dad can drive to Walmart or Wegman's on a Saturday, park near the store, load up on a gigantic amount of food for the week, drive home to their single-family house with a driveway, and unload everything easily. Snow or rain? No problem.

It's too bad we can't go back to the good old pre-sprawl days of the 1930's, when Mom or Dad had to walk or take the bus to the crappy downtown markets, load up only as many groceries as they could carry back to the bus (or maybe they had one of those lovely wagons they schlepped through the streets), and get soaked in the rain, frozen in the winter, or melted in the summer.

Ah, how most people long for those good old days.

This article threatens our right to have an IDA in every town and village competing against each other and creating additional expenses. Call Mike Bartlett.

it wont be long b-4 the whole east side will be gone and the crackheads will be moving out the ring!cheektowaga,ken-ton,lackawana,basically anywhere that the metro goes ! oh and grand island too!!you need to go where the busses dont go!!!

Wegmans 601 Amherst Street $8.83/SF assessed value
Epic building Bryant and Elmwood $74.86/SF assessed value

How about moving the city to a Land Value Tax instead of the traditional property tax?

This would encourage this kind of development, and discourage big box stores. Or, it would at least do a better job of hiding big box stores by filling in parking lots.

Yes, "destroy market-manipulating zoning codes."

And get rid of market-manipulating subsidies like extensions of the "interstate" highway system that go to suburbs.

The logic of this article only works if one assumes there is a MARKET for dense, mixed use, urban buildings. There is- downtown, Elmwood, Hertel, maybe a few more places (and, obviously, downtown Asheville, NC).

But the logic falls apart in marginal neighborhoods where, even if you built dense and urban, the tax revenue would not follow because there's no functional real estate market in these places. That's because the decision there is not between sprawling Wal-Mart and multi-story urban. The decision in these places is between vacant land and anything else.

Changing the zoning will help, but zoning can only take you so far. You can't as easily change the real estate market.

Sort of off topic: Plus topic @B. Rising's FORUMS

Are David Steele and Albert J. Steele, Jr. related? The Steeles are a huge family within Buffalo and David Steele's family are from Buffalo.

All of the comments at "Mr. Demolition Man" at TBN have been removed including the ones pertaining to sad family infighting.

Great post Steele. Think the Powers That Be ever actually read these posts?

Let's not overlook the fact that so, so much of what drives suburban life is the desire (or sacred right, some feel) to consume. Bigger cars, bigger lawns, bigger homes ("I don't want to live on top of my neighbor.") And, then there is the "school and safety issue"...

Fact is, every city in the nation, from NYC to New Orleans to Cleveland, is experiencing a new urbanist movement.....young families are moving back in to the city, eschewing the "safety" of the 'burbs for some diversity, walkability (can you imagine, for groceries even), and to lead more environmentally-aware (and healthy) lifestyles.

Why should Buffalo be any different? Love the Land Value Tax concept.....I agree--let's get going and stop talking. We might need a new Mayor to get that done, however.......

Sprawl is easy just tax the true cost of infrastructure

There is no way a rural or suburban costs are being passed on. The hundreds of miles of xpressways, sewars, gas mains, water mains, electric lines, street lights, signage, snow plowing, etc,

Conversely, unionization of civil servants has devastated cities to the point were its cheaper to maintain rural and suburban services despite fewer people per mile than it is in higher density cities. Some Buffalo streetsdont get the snow cleared until it melts naturally becausethe unions make it to expensive and the quality ofunionized government services is 3rd world

Good article. I think future historians will look back at sprawl as the biggest contributor to America's downfall. It's unsustainable, both economically and environmentally.

Steele said: "Why is this (sprawl) not a major subject of civic discourse in this era of increasing demand for government austerity?"

The people who build this environment hold a lot of sway with local governments, planning boards etc. Their wishes usually trump any desire to do what is best for the local budget.

Also, a lot of people will put their desires for austerity aside in favor of their strong emotional attachment to many features associated with sprawl. There have been ferocious Tea Party protests at town halls all over the nation over local government initiatives to reign in sprawl spending. Ironic when you consider this group is supposedly founded on small government principals.

That said, I think the fiscal argument against sprawl, as you made in the above article, is the best way to win over its proponents. Talk of environmental quality or high minded ideals won't mean much to people who reject science, believe in UN conspiracy talk, or otherwise don't connect their fondness of sprawl to their ever too high tax bill.

"whatever"
Amherst Street at Wegmans has been improved and there is a traffic signal courtesy of taxpayers.

Perhaps new businesses on Amherst Street could be partially attributed to Wegmans. Though Elmwood has done fine without such big box stores. Development also increased on Transit Road after Exit 49 was constructed, and how lovely it is! You easily find an old Amherst Street but don't know the Wegmans land was populated with businesses in the old Markel Electric factory buildings. A friend had a large commercial cabinet shop there before Wegmans demolished the buildings. I don't know how many people worked on the site before Wegmans was built. Do you? Do you know for a fact that the jobs were not good paying jobs? Present some research and let us know.

What makes Wegmans "sprawl" is the huge parking lot, so similar to huge parking lots present in sprawl developments in the suburbs.

What you don't want to understand is the high cost of low retail prices. Of course I, too, prefer lower prices. According the the AAA the average annual cost of an automobile is $8,776. That does not include the taxpayer subsidies to highways and gasoline prices. It does not include taxpayer subsidies for "free parking".

No - people don't have to own all those cars anyway. If our land is intelligently planned without suburban office parks and zoned to separate residences from offices from stores families can exist again without one car per driver. We can't go back to that past model easily - but we can and will be forced to do it. It will take time, but we must work to have a more efficient landscape so future generations can afford a better quality of life.

Fine - believe your rhetoric about elite wine bars vs. big box stores. That is not the choice. Solid Grounds was not an elite wine bar.

i realize that shooting the messenger is a popular sport whenever steel uploads a new post to bro.

but a fact (x property is worth more per square foot than y property) is still a fact, whether it is steel telling it to you or your best friend telling it to you.

Can't be done? Nobody wants it? I see...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3510/3988257300_57b1933b76.jpg

http://www.phototour.minneapolis.mn.us/pics/7472.jpg

http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Miami-Design-District/P1430022/1104851572_gM4D4-M.jpg

http://www.ackermannwire.com/local-developers-announce-plans-for-unique-urban-retail-development-featuring-publix-and-walmart/

I live, literally, around the corner from Wegmans on Amherst. The parking lot makes the walk a little longer than if the store were right up at the street as in Steel's Chicago example, but I prefer the Wegmans, Yes, that urban Chicago store fits into a higher density environment, but I don't particularly like that concrete and asphalt urban aesthetic. At least the Wegmans gives me a nice wide and deep green space buffer between their parking lot and the public sidewalk. I like that quite a lot. Valu on Hertel and Elmwood is built to the Hertel sidewalk. It looks like sh!t. Wegmans looks worlds better, imo.

Whatever's arguments concerning the relative budget size of roads is persuasive to me. I haven't seen any counterpoint. Like him, I'm skeptical that the comparatively small budget expense (as compared to, say, military spending, transfer payments, education spending, police and fire, etc.) of road construction will somehow be revealed to be the problem which 'brings America to its knees'.

Bini, I guess this makes you a troll. I kid of course.

“New Urbanism” is widely sold as a way to foster close-knit communities and general contentment. Yet no one knows the recipe for good or bad community formation, let alone an easy spatial fix. The zealotry and alarmist rhetoric of new urbanism just increases the divide and does nothing to further their arguments which actually have merit. Put a rational voice to the issue and you might accomplish results.

I can't believe all the pontificating STEEL does around here. Even if he's 100% right, he makes you want to take the other side of the argument.

I established a long time ago that indeed STEEL owns and drives a car, thus contributing himself to evil, pernicious sprawl. But to elitists like him, no one else should be allowed that privilege. We can't be trusted. Not with our cities, and (probably) not with our own lives. Thank God we have these miserable New Urbanist scolds around to show us primordial creatures The Light! Now suddenly I can see! Now I want dense, transit oriented LEED Plutonium-certified microapartments with rain collection buckets that double as bike racks under the CO2-reducing planters. I want to shop only where vegetables are locally grown for three months and eat chilled turnip soup the other nine months. Because like everything else, food has a carbon footprint and that detracts from the value of urban infill property!

What leads me to believe that sprawl is bringing our nation to its knees is reading about $17 million spent reconstructing 2.2 miles of Werhle Drive and $122 million is spent on 4.2 miles of Rt. 219. These are stupid money wasting sprawl projects. There are examples across the nation. There is no payback and it will get worse.

Sprawl lovers, please tell me how you justify the cost of sprawl.

For the record I, too, own a car and advocate walking. I see no contradiction in my views and practices. I also walk because I live in a neighborhood where I can.

Great post Steel. It's disheartening to see the lashing out by those in denial when faced with the reality of sprawl. It's mostly due to how uneducated most people are on the effects of sprawl. Sprawl is sinking this country as it is weighing us down with unsustainable costs and the resulting debt. We are dependent on fossil fuels that are a finite resource and will increasingly cause us to be involved in foreign affairs to protect our access to petroleum. This is a huge problem we are facing and one that will not be easily solved. It appears most people would prefer to stick their heads in the sand and wonder aloud why America is losing it's competitive advantage.

Wake up. Unsustainable sprawl is destroying us from the inside out.