|
Urban sprawl is an important
element in the public policy arena. Statewide sprawl initiatives are
increasingly
common across the country, and elected positions have possibly been won or lost
largely because of candidate’s
positions on the issue. As a result, easy answers to what causes sprawl are
sought so that easy solutions can in turn
be proffered. The idea that sprawling development is the direct result of
highways is a good example. But do the
facts support the allegation?
This study carefully reviewed the magnitude and location of growth in 20 of Ohio’s urbanized areas to isolate
the impact of major road improvements on growth patterns. The study used a
computerized mapping system called
a geographic information system (GIS) to track growth and relate it to specific
road improvements within each
region. The study also used consolidated county data on growth of population,
households, employment and
income, to develop an overall picture of growth on
the state and local levels. The results are significant:
• County-level analysis concluded that growth in Ohio
cannot be described by simple explanations such as
“suburban” or “Interstate”,
but rather depends heavily on the characteristics of the underlying local
economy.
• Growth during the 1990’s went primarily where there was
room for it. In all 20 urbanized areas, growth
occurred primarily in those areas
that had low prior density.
• Population growth within urbanized areas in particular is
a complex phenomenon, not strongly related to
either prior growth or to major road
investment. Other important factors in determining local growth rates
might include taxes, school quality,
housing quality, infrastructure provision, zoning regulations, and
community and business attitudes.
• Major road improvements were not very common. In the
cities reviewed, major road improvements occurred
in only about 10 percent of tracts
over a decade, or about 1 percent per year.
• Major road improvements appear to accommodate, rather
than spur, growth. About 70 percent of population
growth during the 1990’s took place
in census tracts that had no major road improvements.
The study concludes that major road improvements are not
strongly correlated with tract growth. The greater
determinant of growth within Ohio’s urban regions is a tract’s prior
population density.
The implications of this study for Ohio’s land use policy planning are clear:
Road improvements are a generally
blunt, and largely ineffective, way to attract development to specific locations
within urban areas. The control or
prohibition of road improvements is not an effective way
to control growth. Instead, road improvements should be
used to improve mobility by reducing congestion, improving safety and reducing
travel times.
Since local governments are primarily responsible for zoning, their decisions
concerning allowable population
density will be the primary determinant of the magnitude of future growth within
the urban region. Neighborhoods
and suburban communities should work cooperatively to develop sensible growth
management policies that focus
on effective policies: particularly density, infrastructure, schools and tax
rates.
http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/
The Impact of Highways
and Other Major Road Improvements on Urban Growth in Ohio
As the explosive development in Sonoma
will occur with or without freeway expansion there will be relatively little
development in Marin even if we expand the freeway (as in Ohio).
Lets not be so Freeway-Phobic.
|
