Urban Sprawl and Transportation

The automobile has defined our 20th century cities. No other innovation has done more to alter the physical layout of our urban areas and the lifestyle of its residents. Have the changes been for the good or have they done more harm than good? Every American citizen should think this question through for him- or herself, for out of an understanding of the true impact of the automobile can come a better understanding of how we should face our urban future.

There are many perspectives on the impact of the automobile. The following quotes present two contrasting views.

"Future generations will perhaps wonder at our willingness, indeed our eagerness, to sacrifice the education of our children, the care of the ill and the aged, the development of the arts, to say nothing of ready access to nature, for the lop-sided system of mono-transportation, going through low-density areas at sixty miles an hour..."
(Lewis Mumford)

"The reason for preferring private over public transit is not, as often alleged, the perversity of the consumer or his ignorance of economics. ... the basic reason why most urban trips are made by automobile is that the family car, despite its shortcomings, is superior to any other method of transportation, It offers comfort, privacy, limited walking, minimum waiting, and freedom from schedules or routing. It guarantees a seat; protects the traveler from heat, cold and rain; provides space for baggage; carries extra passengers at no extra cost; and for most trips, except those in the center city, gets there faster and cheaper than any other way. The transit rider confronts an entirely different situation. He must walk, wait, stand, and be exposed to the elements. The ride is apt to be costly, slow, and uncomfortable because of antiquated equipment, poor ventilation, and service that is congested in rush hours, infrequent during any other time of day, inoperative at night, and non-existent in suburbia."
(Wilfred Owens, The Brookings Institute)

Should we feel we have sacrificed our cities to the god of the automobile, as Mumford suggests, or should we see it as one of the best things to happen to our culture, providing previously unheard of mobility, convenience and comfort? To answer this question, an understanding of the automobile's impact on cities, and especially on downtowns, needs to be explored.

Types of social impact of transportation

True "social impact analysis" should be value neutral.

The best route is one that provides the maximum social benefit at the least social cost, rather than the lowest financial cost.

"Give us your beautiful rivers and valleys, and we will destroy them... Give us your cities, their historic areas and buildings, their precious parks, cohesive neighborhoods, and we will rend them... Urban freeways cut white swaths through black neighborhoods but this is not discrimination, it matters little whether they are black or white, rich or poor -- although black and poor is easier." (Ian MacHarg)
Anticipatory effects - impact can be felt before construction--e.g., Construction impactsPost-construction consequences
Suggested other pages...
Automobiles and PedestriansEdge Cities
"Urban Networks"