Unincorporated Contra Costa County,
Camino Tassajaro, May 1999.
Photo by Tim Stroshane.
SPILLWAY
A Newsletter about California Water, Land, and People
Developers often find it more profitable to build in outlying areas partly because land is usually cheaper than in older cities, and low-density construction costs less per unit. For example, building codes require structures over four storeis to use more expensive steel frames, instead of wood frame construction. in multi-story buildings, typical of core cities, developers must invest in far more capital equipment, including rental of attached elevators. One advantage an inner city may have in attracting development - an existing array of urban infrastructure - is offset by developer-dominated special districts that pass on the cost of new infrastructure in property taxes.
The fact is, says UC's John Landis, "we should be able to do better," to provide our cities with more diverse housing choices reflecting our demographic, geographic, and cultural diversity, and better urban environments.
Indeed, sprawl is inextricably linked to urban issues in a number of ways. Take "brownfields." The estimated 450,000 abandoned toxic sites in urban areas in the U.S. (with freeway access, sewer, water, and road services already in place) could be cleaned up for redevelopment. Instead, investments flow to the edges of cities where land is cheaper. Obstacles to addressing this problem are psychological, says Carl Anthony, architect and urban environmental justice advocate. "All that is blocking a coalition between environmentalists and the inner city is the way we think. I sometimes call it an 'apartheid of consciousness.'" Yet, with a little consciousness shifting, solutions abound.
Place tight boundaries around all fringe cities past which they cannot spread; increase allowable densities within them, and California may be able to stop sprawl even as it struggles to accommodate growth. Between 1996 and 1999, 15 Bay Area cities adopted urban growth boundaries, beyond which cities will not provide services or approve developments. (Some of the boundaries, however, like those around San Ramon and Brentwood in Contra Costa County are so spacious they still encourage sprawl.)
By sharing property and sales tax revenues equitably, Bay Area cities and counties could end the destructive competition for tax base, and more investment would make the areas better places to live as pedestrian and transit-oriented alternatives to car-dependent suburbs. Local governments could also collaborate regionally to provide housing and social services and restore damaged urban ecosystems too.
But as long as the Bay Area's wealthier communities continue winning new tax base and jobs, while exporting worker housing demand beyond their boundaries, the problems will remain.
"For too long, critiques of suburban sprawl have separated land-use questions from the racial and class conflicts that have plagued America for 400 years," says Carl Anthony. "The critical question we must all answer together is how can we proactively create a social movement that changes the rules of the land-use game to stop sprawl, while addressing social justice in a multicultural society?"