Does Sprawl Really Matter

1
The Brookings Institution
Metropolitan Policy ProgramBruce Katz, Director
Does Sprawl Really Matter?
MetroBusinessNet Annual Convening February 17,
2005
2
Does Sprawl Really Matter?
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
II
What are the consequences of these trends?
III
Why is this happening?
III
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
3
Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
1.
Regional variation is substantial
2.
As people go, so do jobs
3.
Metros remain stratified by race, class, and
ethnicity
4.
4
Cities
Large cities grew faster in the 1990s than they
did in the 1980s and 1970s
50 largest cities, population 1970-2000
Source Brookings calculations of U.S. Census
Bureau data
5
Cities
Several large cities gained population during the
1990s after losing population in the 1980s
Selected cities, population growth 1990-2000
Source U.S. Census Bureau
6
Suburbs
Still, population is decentralizing in nearly
every U.S. metropolitan area
Selected cities and suburbs, population growth
1990-2000
Source HUD State of the Cities Data Systems
7
Suburbs
Suburbs grew faster than cities in the 1990s
Percent population growth, 100 largest cities and
suburbs 1990-2000
Source U.S. Census Bureau
8
Suburbs
Every household type grew at faster rates in the
suburbsthan in cities
Population growth, 1990-2000
Source William Frey. A Census 2000 Study of
City and Suburb Household Change. Brookings,
Forthcoming
9
Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
1.
Regional variation is substantial
2.
As people go, so do jobs
3.
Metros remain stratified by race, class, and
ethnicity
4.
10
In the Northeast/Midwest stagnant growth and
sprawl are common
Change in population and density, 1982-1997
Source Fulton et al, 2001
11
In the South/Southeast, many cities are growing
and spreading out
Change in population and density, 1982-1997
Source Fulton et al, 2001
12
In the West, some cities are growing and
densifying
Change in population and density, 1982-1997
Source Fulton et al, 2001
13
Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
1.
Regional variation is substantial
2.
As people go, so do jobs
3.
Metros remain stratified by race, class, and
ethnicity
4.
14
Nationally, one-third of jobs are located outside
a 10-mile radius of the central business district
Share of jobs within 3-, 10-, and greater-
than-10-mile radius of center, 1996
15
Employment decentralization
In many metros, an exit ramp economy dominates
office development.
Share of metropolitan office space (SQ FT), 1999
16
Employment decentralization
But the level of employment decentralization
varies widely across metropolitan areas.
Share of metropolitan employment, 1999
17
Employment decentralization
Consequently, the highest share of metropolitan
commutes begin and end within suburbs
Share of commuters 100 Largest Cities, 2000
Source U.S. Census Bureau
18
Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
1.
Regional variation is substantial
2.
As people go, so do jobs
3.
Metros remain stratified by race, class, and
ethnicity
4.
19
Higher job sprawl is associated with higher
levels of job mismatch for blacks and Latinos
Blacks/jobs mismatch versus job sprawl in U.S.
metros, 2000
Blacks/Jobs Mismatch Index
Source Stoll, 2005
Job Sprawl
20
Concentrated poverty remains overwhelmingly in
inner cities
Population of high-poverty neighborhoods by
location, 2000
21
For example, in Chicago, almost all high-poverty
tracts are inside the city limits
High-poverty tracts, 2000
22
And minorities remain disproportionately in the
inner-city and the Southern suburbs
Non-Asian minority students, 1997
23
while jobs move North and West
Jobs by Zipcode, 2001
24
Does Sprawl Really Matter?
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
II
What are the consequences of these trends?
III
Why is this happening?
IV
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
25
Unbalanced growth is costly
Decentralization is Costly
Diminishes Economic Competitiveness Quality of
Life
26
Density contributes to economic performance
through
By decentralizing, metros are foregoing the
economic benefits of density
Productivity gains
Innovation gains
27
Density contributes to productivity
Average labor productivity increases with more
employment density
Ciccone and Hall (1996)
Accessible cities with efficient transportation
systems had higher productivity than more
dispersed places (47 metro areas)
Cervero (2000)
Compared to others, growth management metros were
likely to see improvements in metropolitan level
personal income
Nelson and Peterman (2000)
28
Density contributes to innovation by attracting
young, educated workers
High density brings with it amenities that create
a high quality of place that attracts young
knowledge-workers
Ideas, innovation, and creativity now drive the
economy
Economic success requires large numbers of people
with a college education and high skills
29
Educated metro areas win in the new economy
Each additional year of education of workers in a
metro area leads to another 2.8 percent growth in
productivity
Rauch (1993)
The cities and metros with highly skilled workers
in the 1990s also had high population and income
growth
Glaeser et al (2000)
The metro areas that have high proportions of
skilled, educated labor are better able to
reinvent themselves and adapt to changing
economic needs
Glaeser et al (2003)
30
Density enhances innovation by increasing
interactions and knowledge-sharing among workers
Dense labor markets, efficient transport, and
high clustering of jobs lead to knowledge
spillovers, both within and across industries
Denser local economies have been linked to
increased patenting
Carlino (2001)
31
Unbalanced growth is costly
Increases Costs on Communities and Taxpayers
32
Unbalanced growth is costly
Low density development imposes greater costs on
state and localities

• Low density development increases demand for

• New schools
• New roads
• New public facilities
• Sewer and water extensions

Low density development increases the costs of
key services

• Police
• Fire
• Emergency medical

33
Studies estimate the degree of capital cost
savings from denser development
Estimated cost by community prototype
Source Real Estate Research Corporation (1974)
34
...an idea substantiated by Florida case studies
Florida Growth Patterns Study Total Public
Facilities Costs by Development Type (Per
Dwelling Unit 1989 Dollars)
Source Duncan (1989)
35
Kansas City is the 28th largest metro
Studies estimate the service delivery savings
from more compact development
Dollar costs of new services (including police,
fire, highway, schools, and solid waste) per
1,000 new residents for a family of 4 in Kentucky
Source Bollinger, Berger, and Thompson (2001)
36
The density-related fiscal savings are estimated
to be substantial
Nationwide, more compact development could save
governments 11 on capital outlays over the long
term
More compact development could save governments
almost 4 on service provision
Source Muro Puentes (2004)
37
Unbalanced growth is costly
Leads to Fiscal Disparities
38
For example, in Philadelphia, tax capacity per
household
Tax capacity per household, 1998
39
correlates with educational expenditure per
pupil
Expenditure per pupil, 1997
40
Unbalanced growth is costly
Strains the Transportation System and Increases
Travel Costs
41
Unbalanced growth is costly
Sprawling growth patterns are straining states
transportation systems and increasing travel costs

• Decentralization
• Widens the area that needs to be served by roads
  and increases road building costs.
• Generates more driving miles adding to
  congestion.
• Adds to household costs.
• Deepens the states road-maintenance crisis.

42
For example, commuting patterns in Chicago have
become inordinately complex
County-to-county worker flows, 2000
43
Unbalanced growth is costly
Isolates Minorities and Low-Income Residents From
Opportunities
44
Unbalanced growth is costly
Decentralization isolates low-income residents
minorities from opportunities.

• Decentralization
• Exacerbates social isolation in the core.
• Reduces educational opportunities in cities and
  older suburbs.
• Distances poor people from job opportunities.

45
In areas such as Miami, a spatial mismatch has
arisen between high-poverty neighborhoods and
areas of high job growth
Major Cities
Poverty Rate gt 20
Job Growth gt 50
46
Does Sprawl Really Matter?
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
II
What are the consequences of these trends?
III
Why is this happening?
IV
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
47
Major federal and state policies facilitate
sprawl and impede city revitalization
A recent Brookings report on Pennsylvania found 5
specific types of state policies that favor
greenfield development and undermine city
economies
48
III
Why is this happening?
Skewed Investments
Unlevel Tax System
Weak Planning
Barriers to Reinvestment
Fragmented Governance
49
Major state spending programs have skewed funding
to greenfields
50
In Pennsylvania newer suburbs received 58 percent
of classifiable spending during this period,
although they represent only 42 percent of the
states population
Share of population versus share of
transportation investment, 1999-2002
Source U.S. Census Bureau, Anne Canby and James
Bickford, 10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania
51
At the same time, Pennsylvania is spreading its
economic development money all across the map
PIDA, OFP, and IDP investments, 1998-2003
Source Keystone Research Center
DCED Programs
PIDA Recipients
OGP Recipients
IDP Recipients
Municipal Type
City
Borough
1st-class township
2nd-class township
52
III
Why is this happening?
Skewed Investments
Unlevel Tax System
Weak Planning
Barriers to Reinvestment
Fragmented Governance
53
State tax systems are biasedagainst cities
City revenue bases are small (e.g., large
numbers of tax exempt properties)
City expenses are high(e.g., concentrated
poverty, union contracts)
54
III
Why is this happening?
Skewed Investments
Unlevel Tax System
Weak Planning
Barriers to Reinvestment
Fragmented Governance
55
In most states, cities lacks effective regional-
or state-level planning, strategizing, and
coordination capacity

• Disparate state agencies do not plan in
  accordance with a coherent, unified vision
• Disparate state agencies plan separately and
  often act at cross-purposes
• As a consequence, there is a lost opportunity to
  use policies to generate markets and create wealth

56
A lack of consistency requirements ensures land
use planning remains essentially optional and
frequently uncoordinated

• In many states local zoning ordinances do not
  conform to local or regional plans
• Required county plans remain advisory

57
III
Why is this happening?
Skewed Investments
Unlevel Tax System
Weak Planning
Barriers to Reinvestment
Fragmented Governance
58
Barriers to reinvestment

• Barriers to brownfield development hinder their
  productive reuse
• Information gaps, limited marketability, and
  ineffective acquisition processes keep many
  vacant and abandoned industrial properties idle
• Barriers to the rehabilitation of older
  buildings perpetuate their deterioration

59
III
Why is this happening?
Skewed Investments
Unlevel Tax System
Weak Planning
Barriers to Reinvestment
Fragmented Governance
60
Many rustbelt states have large numbers of local
governments
Total local governments, 2002
Source U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Census of
Governments Includes county governments
61
The profusion of local governments undermines
city and state competitiveness in several ways

• CMUs Jerry Paytas concludes that fragmented
  regions saw their share of the total income
  generated in 285 metro areas slip between 1972
  and 1997
• Paul Lewis concludes fragmentation results in
  decreased shares of office space in central
  business districts, less centrality, longer
  commute times, more edge cities, and more sprawl

62
Does Sprawl Really Matter?
I
What is the nature of metro growth in the U.S.
II
What are the consequences of these trends?
III
Why is this happening?
IV
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
63
IV
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
Smart Growth
Smart growth involves efforts to change the
governmental rules of the development game that
facilitate sprawl and concentrate poverty Smart
growth efforts are designed to slow
decentralization, promote urban reinvestment, and
enhance access to opportunity
64
IV
What policy solutions are available to affect
positive change?
The SmartGrowthAgenda
65
Smart Growth Reforms State Examples
Regional Governance
Metropolitan Suballocation in California
Land Use Reform
Clean Ohio Fund
Maryland Smart Growth and Neighborhood
Conservation Act (1997)
Infrastructure
Minnesota Fiscal Disparities Law
Taxation
Access to Opportunity
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee
66
Smart Growth Reforms Local and Regional Examples
Regional Governance
Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Council
Land Use Reform
Philadelphia Neighborhood Transformation
Initiative
Transit-Oriented Development Arlington County,
VA
Infrastructure
Access to Opportunity
Inclusionary Zoning Montgomery County, MD
67
www.brookings.edu/metro