Urban planning is in the news, both in the Pontiac and around Canada. While the subject may seem boring and inconsequential, it really is one of the most important and impactful responsibilities of local governments.
Zoning directly shapes the landscapes where we live, and so is something to which we should pay a lot of attention.
The main debate in contemporary planning can be simplified as sprawl versus densification. Sprawl development means spreading single family homes across a large space where services and amenities are designed to be reached by car, while dense development is where homes and businesses are built close together and designed to have services within walking distance or accessible by public transportation.
In most places in Canada and the United States, since the 1950s, sprawl has been the preferred method of development. Cheap cars and seemingly endless land brought what seemed like a luxury of owning your own home within reach for millions of people. In the process, it broke from the centuries-old tradition of cities and towns being densely packed.
After over 70 years of this new approach to urban planning, the consequences need to be taken into account, not least by municipal leaders in the Pontiac. As more and more people look to move out of cities and larger towns into smaller, quieter, friendlier and safer communities, municipal decision-makers are coming under increasing pressure from developers to approve plans that might maximize the developers’ short-term profits but would not be that great for the long-run well-being of the communities involved.
Empirically, sprawl has shown itself to be unsustainable environmentally, economically and socially.
Environmentally, sprawl – with its demand for land and requirements for a vehicle to get anywhere – causes environmental damage and CO2 production that is just not necessary. Climate change and the degradation of our environment is by far the most serious issue we face as society, and therefore needs to be seriously confronted at all levels. This means reigning in practices that lead to CO2 emissions.
Beyond the encroachment and destruction of animal habitats, in many cases sprawl also eats up land that otherwise could be used for agriculture. With global warming, myriad forms of environment degradation, and conflict disrupting agricultural production worldwide, the protection of viable agricultural land needs to be a priority.
Whether we are driving gas-powered or electric cars, we are still driving vehicles that are produced at a high and unsustainable cost to the environment. Anything we can do to reduce the need for people to drive is smart. Realistically, rural residents need personal transportation, but making it easier for people in Pontiac’s towns and villages to buy groceries, get health services and mail a letter without having to drive is sensible policy.
Economically, in the short run, urban sprawl and its promise of land sales and increased tax revenue from an influx of new residents may be appealing to municipalities. But, in the long run, urban sprawl is a huge financial burden on municipalities and a death sentence for many small businesses.
Beyond the initial high cost of building roads and extending services into large sprawled developments, the long-term costs of maintaining them –water, sewage and electricity, among other utilities – are far higher than in dense developments.
The long-run financial unsustainability of sprawl has been documented by groups such as Urban3 and the U.S based non-profit Strong Towns. A major finding of their work, which can easily be found online, is that property tax revenue just doesn’t cover all the public costs associated with maintaining far flung suburban housing, meaning they are often subsidized from the productive economy.
Also, small businesses in a sprawled environment get easily outcompeted by big businesses as they end up being just as far away from people’s homes and therefore just as disconnected from the community. Densification means that businesses can truly be embedded in a community whereby all the profits are not just siphoned out.
Socially, urban sprawl has been connected to people’s isolation and the destruction of community spirit. In sprawled areas people are less likely to know their neighbour, live close to family or be able to walk to local community events. Dense housing means people not only live closer to each other, but also to places where people congregate – restaurants, clubs, pubs, churches, parks and other recreational or civic locations.
The prospect of Pontiac growing presents an opportunity to our municipal leaders to lead local development in a way that benefits from the lessons of urban sprawl. Pontiac is beautifully positioned to develop in a way that attracts people wanting to escape the dullness, disconnection and unaffordability of the suburbs. Pontiac could grow in a way that makes it a leader in protecting agricultural lands and natural habitats, the very treasures that distinguish the Pontiac from so much of the rest of the continent where development at any cost seems to be the mantra.
We should make better use of our in-town spaces to house more people rather than allowing development to sprawl into nearby forests and farmland. The choice is clear: make the same mistakes as everyone else for short-term benefit, or build the Pontiac for the long run.
Brett Thoms
