Title- Precursors to contemporary forms of sprawl
‘No occupation is delightful to me as the earth’. (Jefferson, Thomas) The historical origins of the Urban sprawl can be traced back to Thomas Jefferson who is considered by many as the father of urban sprawl. With Architecture as his educational background and holding the post of the third President, Jefferson was highly influential in encouraging people to move away from the cities, to the suburbs or the Edge Cities so as to own large piece of land that they can till. In the 18th century, under his Presidency, pursuit of self sufficiency as an underlying philosophy was encouraged and promoted. Self sufficiency was believed to be possible if farming became the core or the foundation of one’s existence. In the land policy introduced by Thomas Jefferson in 1785, land was divided into areas of six square miles, and each of the township was divided into 640 acre sections. The people who owned the land were expected to use it for farming.
‘Those who labour in the earth are the chosen people of God, if ever he had a chosen people,’ (Jefferson, Thomas) “Pastoralism blends the moral benefits of rural life with the technological benefits of civilized life” (Rowe,1991). Thomas Jefferson strongly advocated the notion of the ‘middle state ‘ or the ‘middle link’ which would be the basis for ‘ virtue of happiness’. He believed the garden would also become the key representation of the person who owns the land. Thomas Jefferson vision was to create an egalitarian landscape. Most importantly he believed that there is a strong association with attainment of liberty through ownership of land. He believed in equality and the idea of the middle link was also an effort in bringing about equality. The middle link was for the people to move away from the chaos of the city, to a space that is situate close to the city, but a space that is amidst nature that is organised and cultivated. He believed that this would bring about tranquillity in the soul of the person residing in these lands.
1|Page
There were many cultural antecedents which also was a reason for people to willingly move to the outskirts or the suburbs of the city which caused the urban sprawl. The cities in the 18th century was filled with theft ,crime, and prostitution. A substantial amount of people who resided in the city were considered to be with less morals and the people from the lower income groups, who had moved to the cities to support the industries. The cheap housing in the city, attracted many labourers who lived in small quarters both with poor hygiene and sanitation. Thus the rich and the middle class preferred to move to the outskirts of the city which was considered to be safe. With good transportation network, more and more people began to move away from the urban centers. The suburbs as mentioned earlier represented the ‘middle landscape’. This became the ‘middle link’ between the dense urban center and the wilderness or the more natural world. The suburbia that sprang up along all the urban centers would many a times called themself villages. The reason being they believed that there was a better quality of life in villages. The villages offered peace, safety and security with higher morals. The higher income groups needed to be close enough to the city center as they wanted the proximity to the urban center, which were the center for businesses. Suburb was also considered as place that is associated with 3p’s, pious, privileged and pride. It is said that the American Government land policy also both encouraged and supported the growth of suburbs. Vast amounts of land was available in relationship to the population. With respect to Chicago in particular, it was one of the perfect examples of a city in the 19th century. The city grew both vertically and horizontally. It was considered one of the fastest growing cities in the country, more than New York City. It held a special position in the American landscape as it held all of the five virtues a city was expected to have. It was designed as a grid city with diagonals to break the monotony and restrictions of a grid city. Daniel Burnham, the designer, planned the city with extensive open spaces that broke the rigidity of the grid. His vision was in creating a city that was aesthetically pleasing. As per the lecture by Professor, it was said that he believed that anything is possible in Chicago as Chicago had already achieved what no other city could achieve. It was already one of the 2|Page
technologically efficient city, with the city being planned in two levels, raised by an entire level, so as to not visualise the transportation vehicles but view only the beauty of the sea. It was one of the few cities where miles of the sea line were developed as public spaces rather than having businesses occupy the most aesthetically pleasing areas of the city. The planning of the city was influenced by the Versailles in France. In addition to being a grid city, it was a three dimensional city as it had an extensive array of skyscrapers in the city center and low rise suburbs in the periphery. It was a city with multi-level transportation system which separated the service vehicles from the passenger vehicles, and thus encouraged the horizontal development by enabling trouble-free commute in and out of the city. There was another reason for the urban sprawl that was so prominent in Chicago. In 1871, there was a great fire that originated in one of the houses and spread to thousands of several square kms as most of the construction was made out of wood and there were no fire codes for buildings. This led to stringent fire codes for buildings which made construction of buildings in the center of the city very expensive. Thus more and more people constructed their houses on the periphery. With the availability of technology pre fabricated houses for 5000 dollars were also constructed within a week for the hundreds of thousands of people who were left homeless. As stated by Professor in the lecture, Chicago was the ‘most technically sophisticated modern city’ of the 19th century. Only Chicago could rise up from the ashes and rebuild at such a rapid pace. Lastly, Chicago being in the mid-west had limitless acres of land towards the west that it could encapsulate as suburbs of Chicago.
With regards to the suburban development in Washington DC many other factors played an important role. As per the writing in the paper ‘Monumental Washington’ by John W Reps, L’Enfant who was invited by the President to design the city plan for the capital. The city was planned as a combination of a grid and the diagonal system. It was a unique effort to have the best philosophies of Thomas Jefferson and L’Enfant. However L’Enfant was removed prior to completion of the master plan as he was not willing to work with the directions of the commissioners. 3|Page
Particularly in DC, many freed people, moved to DC as they felt safe in the capital after abolition of slavery. Thus the center of the city was getting overpopulated and filled with crime and increasing African American Population. This caused the middle class and the rich to move away from the centre of the city. The city began developing in the fringes of the city and very far away from the city. The spaces in between were said to have taken much longer to develop. With specific reference to Detroit, which is another unique example, we see that after the collapse of the automobile industry, fringe development of the cities rose with not just residential bu also commercial development. The businesses in the urban centers was shutting down and moving to the suburbs where there the middle and higher income group people lived. The center of the city was populated with mostly African Amercian and safety was of great concern. Thus the Urban Sprawl in Detroit was a new kind that America witnesses and it was beyond only residential development.
With regards to contemporary forms of sprawl in developing nation such as China, Brazil and India, suburban development is a relatively new phenomenon. There has been unprecedented development in China and India. With respect to China, the road network was extensively developed in the late 20th century to facilitate high rise and dense urban areas in the urban center and low rise in the periphery of the cities. In the process thousands of acres of land was acquired and people were displaced to the suburbs. The people with higher income could still afford to live in the urban center and many preferred to live in the city center, unlike the philosophy of the 19th century. The city centers were not filled with crime, and is considered to be safe and has all the infrastructure to support the requirement of the dense living and working. This is stark contrast to repercussions faced by people in America in 19th century. The rich moved in search of the middle landscape. Also when American cities expanded horizontally they did not displace millions of people, as the population was still in its infancy. One of the images shown in the lecture by Professor depicted several men on horses who rode across the land 4|Page
to mark their territory. This picture is a perfect depiction of what we understand as the Wild West. Whoever reached the land parcel first and planted their belongings could claim ownership of that property. The Urban Sprawl in 19th century was intended to bring about equality and liberty to the people based on Thomas Jefferson philosophy that if you till your own land, you can be self sufficient. However the urban sprawl in the 21st century can be looked at something that has widened the gap between the have’s and have not’s. The have-nots are relegated to small holes and are entirely dependent on using motorised vehicles to commute, where as prior to the urban sprawl most of them were depended on bicycles. The few who depended on agricultural land for their livelihood, also lost their land to development. For the first time it is said that China is not self sufficient, but needs to import food from other countries. Thus though the urban sprawl is not a contemporary or recent happening, the reasons for urban sprawl today are a result of very different issues and problems the cities face today. In India, we are seeing urban sprawl which is more organic in nature. If we take Bangalore as an example as it is one of the fastest growing cities in the world, it is seeing the pains of growth to an extent where it is considered to be one of the most unlivable cities of today. The reason being there is radial unplanned growth and development in all directions from the center of the city. The urban sprawl precedes infrastructure development. The unplanned urban sprawl has caused tremendous loss of agricultural land, as the unplaaned growth has happened many a times on the most fertile land and has encroached several lakes. More importantly it has witnessed pollution of the remaining lakes and the groundwater and soil has been contaminated in many of the newly developed areas which have no infrastructure. The sprawl that we have seen in the 19th century and in China, was planned sprawl as infrastructure was planned for development. India is different as infrastructure development lags behind the sprawl at a snail pace. It is also said that in the 19th century cities developed based on the transit system and the railroad system. In India, we see transit systems are based on the existing city landuse for the central district. Many a times the land use completely undergoes a change as high 5|Page
residential neighbourhoods change to middle income housing, as high end neighbourhoods do not want to be situated in areas where there is projected to be high traffic. The land value and use in the outskirts of the city grow in accordance to the transit route, and economically benefit from the introduction of a transit system.
Today there are several problems we are facing as a result of the urban sprawl. Around the globe, we are going through climate change and a crisis is imminent if we fail to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The urban sprawl of yesteryears was when there was abundance of all natural resources. Today we are aware of our finite supplies, and we are also aware that we need to reduce our dependence on oil. Sprawl is directly related to the idea of convenience and affordability to drive to the center of the city form the suburbs. Barring a few cities, many cities in US are predominantly dominated by cars, due to the history of development of the cities, which were designed with cars as the focal point of development. To curb green house gas emissions from the cars, is to change the fundamental way many of the cities were planned. Altering the landscape of the city to make pedestrian as the focal point of design, is and will be a huge challenge in the coming years. American cities are taken as examples by developing countries and urban planning has been done with car as the focus. Two centuries later, the cities in India have not utilised the learning from the American cities and planned the cities with open space, mass transit and density as key elements. Washington as an example has stood the test of time, which even after 200 years has been to resilient so as to accommodate growth and change. The vast open spaces and wide roads, which were part of the original master plan, has enabled it to withstands the test of time. Indian cities have not utilised enough, the learning from the excellent planning philosophies of few of the American cities. Rather because of the unplanned growth, Indian cities are witnessing some of the worst problems that are, a result of Urban Sprawl. To begin with the Urban Sprawl has increased the cost of infrastructure development per capita and cost of maintenance of the same. In addition, urban sprawl reduces the efficiency of space, as many spaces between the center 6|Page
of the city and developed suburbs remain undeveloped and underutilised. Most importantly the world needs to move into promoting self sustainable communities, and curbing urban sprawl and reducing land area per person could be a start to achieve the same.
To summarize, based on the readings and the lectures given by the Professor, it is clear that urban sprawl is not a recent phenomenon but a phenomenon of the past. The most important concept of sprawl in the US was to create the middle landscape which meant allocating a piece of earth to each human being for him to cultivate and be self sufficient. Today, urban sprawl is at the loss of agriculture land which defeats the very purpose of the 19th century sprawl. Thomas Jefferson is blamed for introducing the concept of planning of the urban sprawl. However his vision of the urban sprawl was to create the middle link between the wilderness and civilization, which is to move away from the chaos of the urban center and yet not be in absolute wilderness. Even today many move away from the city center in search of the middle link. How we achieve the middle landscape without the urban sprawl and be self sufficient, is a question we need to ponder on, as the population in developing countries is presently more than a billion and is only increasing in a finite world with finite resources.
References 1. Rowe, Peter, ‘ Making A Middle Landscape’, Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1991 2. Stephen K. Poston, ‘Place In The Middle Landscape’ , Thesis submitted to the faculty of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, January 1997 Website: https://theses.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd44922241971540/unrestricted/spbook.pd f 3. Michael S. Mahoney, ‘Technology and the Democratic Ideal: The Search for a Middle Landscape’, Princeton University Website: https://www.princeton.edu/~hos/h398/midland.html
7|Page
4. Carin R, ‘Suburbs and the Idea of Washington in the late 19th Century’, January 1 2014 Website: http://www.ruffnotes.org/blog/2014/1/1/suburbs-and-the-idea-of-washingtonin-the-late-19th-century.html 5. HARC E 178, Recorded Lectures by Professor Alex Krieger, Harvard Extension School, Spring 2017
8|Page