Perhaps There is a Call for Sprawl

I am a child of sprawl.

My earliest memories are of our house at the keystone of a cul-de-sac in Beaverton, Oregon. Our house backed up to other houses and our street, lined with homes, connected and intersected with similar thoroughfares. We didn’t necessarily live in a neighborhood, but we certainly lived in a subdivision. It was the early 1970s and the Uhles family had hunkered down in what was then just beginning to be referred to as suburban sprawl.

Our little patch of paradise – or perdition, depending on perspective – was developed for the commuter class that worked in nearby Portland. Later, we would move to what was euphemistically referred to as a golf community northwest of Houston, Texas. There was, in fact, a golf course, but the reality was, it was another subdivision built with commuters in mind.

Primarily associated with the housing boom that followed the end of World War II, the term urban or suburban sprawl took traction in the British newspaper the Times as a derogatory reflection on post-war developments sprouting up around London. In the United States, our attitude toward the unrestricted growth expanding out from city centers feels a little more forgiving. Certainly there are those – and I count myself among them – that deride the vacant culture associated with the strip malls and fast food that represent sprawl convenience, but that does not mean that that particular brand of development does not have its place.

It's not a phenomenon unique to the largest cities. While anti-sprawl critics often point to large developments outside large cities – such as Inland Empire east of Los Angeles County – the truth is population centers of any size are susceptible. As long as there is land where regulations are fluid and prices right, sprawl can happen. I was recently in a rural area about an hour east of Charleston, and small houses – less than 1000 square feet – were being built and offered to the new commuter class. Residents will not find much in the way of amenities – strip malls and Circle Ks are yet to arrive – but it will not be long.

Locally, we have seen this time and again. When I moved out to Evans in 2006, I joked that I lived so far out that my house was marked by a dragon on the map. That has not aged well. Today I’m within a mile of two convenience stores, a grocery store and the most emblematic of suburban establishments – Starbucks. Recently, ground was broken on a development off I-20’s Exit 1 in South Carolina that will feature sprawl-centric retail and thousands of homes. Is this progress out of control, or development meeting the needs of our current population?

Despite my aesthetic and cultural objections, I’m afraid I must vote the latter.

I love urban environs and, despite my house-kids-dogs-yard lifestyle, self-identify as urban-leaning. But every time I venture into those cityscapes I long to be a part of, I see societal issues accelerating and amplifying. Cities, which I once saw as the endlessly exciting hives of industry and culture, have become places where many cannot afford to stay or leave – resulting in blight and homelessness. Cities have become prohibitively expensive to live in and yet depend on a blue collar and service industry culture to sustain it. There is an imbalance that is not being addressed. It’s like the late, great Joe Strummer said – you can’t have the honey without the bees.

Certainly, I am not proposing that building a lovely three-bedroom ranch 30 minutes outside of a city center is the answer for someone currently sleeping on the streets. What I am saying, however, is as density decreases, so does demand. And as demand decreases, so does the cost of living. I’m not a fan of development for its own sake, an out-of-control approach of building without plan or forethought. I do believe, however, as populations increase, that the once-standard binary model of urban and rural will become increasingly outdated. Cities can either grow out or up – and out is far more sustainable and economically feasible. Our job, as a society, is to ensure that growth is handled responsibly, sprawl, after all, is only a problem if we allow it to become one.