Suburbanization and Public Health

This article is a summary of research by Dr. Howard Frumkin and published in Public Health Reports. Dr. Frumkin writes on connections between various aspects of suburban development and pollution, mental health, physical fitness, and preventable deaths due to automobile accidents.

The relationship between automobiles and air pollution is discussed first, and this research notes that there is a significant correlation between vehicle miles traveled and proportions of hydrocarbons, oxides, and nitrogen, as well as other greenhouse gasses, in urban atmosphere. It is also noted that due to weather conditions, air pollution does not remain in the immediate vicinity of roads, but can travel downwind of where it is released. The study notes that increased pollution can pose an increased risk to those with asthma, as well as the elderly and newborn.

This study also points out the connection between density and vehicle miles traveled, noting that the less dense a location is, the more driving that will take place and the more pollution that will be created.

The second topic discussed is that of deaths due to automobile crashes and poor accommodations of pedestrians. While it is noted that improvements in vehicle and infrastructure safety have decreased traffic fatalities in recent years, the study points out that typical suburban layouts are highly conducive to automobile traffic while being dangerous to pedestrians. This is due to lack of connected secondary roads and main arteries which can often be three or more lanes in each direction. Proper pedestrian amenities such as sidewalks and crossing lights are not likely to be present, although this is changing.

Again, a correlation is established between low density and traffic deaths, both in cases involving two or more automobiles and in cases involving automobiles and pedestrians.

The next topics discussed are those of land use, travel patterns, and physical activity. The study notes that dense land use is highly correlated with both walking and bicycling, while lower density is correlated with higher automobile use. Similarly, lower automobile use is correlated with higher physical activity, as denser environments increase connectivity and make methods of traveling such as walking and bicycling much more viable.

Access to water is also mentioned in the study, noting that less dense development will contribute highly to water pollution, as paved surfaces such as parking lots will prohibit water from entering the ground and the water table, and will instead force it to pick up pollutants as it runs to storm drains. In addition, this reduction in aquifer capacity will reduce available water for these areas.

The urban heat island is touched upon as well, noting that pavement and dark roofs absorb heat and locally increase temperatures. It is noted that this can lead to increases in cases of heat stroke, heat exhaustion, and other heat related conditions. These can have especially severe effects on the young, elderly, and disabled, who are not as mobile, as well as the impoverished, who may not have access to air conditioning.

Mental health is one of the most drastic aspects of suburbanization that the study goes on to discuss. It notes that increased commuting can lead to elevated stress levels and physical ailments. This can be manifested by “road rage”, in which motorists are inclined to commit violent or threatening acts against other motorists. This can lead to a generally more violent society, as not only does violence becomes an accepted way to deal with stress, but also commuting long distances by car can lead to social isolation.

Degradation of social capital is the last aspect of suburbanization discussed in this study, social capital is the idea that social networks can be used to achieve certain tangible goals, such as employment. The study notes that a correlation has been noticed between suburbanization and decreased social capital, manifested in lack of trust and increased family anguish. It mentions the primary cause of this to be the income segregation of suburban development, but also notes that time spent commuting is time spent away from friends and family and less time to give back to the community, either through PTA meetings, community service, or neighborhood events. Neighborhood design is a large factor in social isolation, as single use development set back from streets and with minimal sidewalk space deters the usage of outdoor space.

VDOT Sees Sprawl as Good Politics

A month ago, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) reversed its neighborhood connectivity standards. In doing so, it threw out progressive, anti-sprawl regulations made in 2009.

In Virginia, when a developer builds a development, they construct the roads and then VDOT acquires them from the developer and covers their maintenance costs. In 2009, VDOT edited their regulations as to what they require from developers to include connectivity. With this, the number of roads in a development would be divided by the number of intersections, yielding the “connectivity index” of the development. These regulations stipulated that cul-de-sacs and other road termini count as intersections, but roads that terminate at the property line of the development without connecting to adjacent roads in another development do not, thus discouraging isolated developments connected only by a main road.

However, the regulations made permissions for “incompatible uses” or developments separated by natural boundaries (such as railroad tracks or streams) to be exempt from these connectivity standards, but went on to say that residential and commercial uses are always compatible and should be connected when possible.

Ironically, these original regulations were made with the understanding that they would save the state money in the long term, as less funding would be required to plow roads, install utilities, and provide police protection, fire protection, and educational facilities. In addition to this, it would also make main roads safer by diverting traffic off of them, save time by offering direct routes to destinations, and promote walking and bicycling, as secondary routes with lower speeds and less traffic were available.

However, in what seems to be nothing more than a political statement, VDOT and the Republican governor Bob McDonnell decided to throw these regulations out the window. Allowing for single use, cul-de-sac centered sprawl to grow without bound, and causing increased traffic congestion, increased rates of automobile accidents, increased pollution, and unnecessary spending on utilities and services.

 

Why, then, did VDOT and Governor McDonnell allow this to happen?

The answer is simple, ideology and politics got in the way of facts and numbers. Govenor McDonnell and VDOT decided to conveniently ignore the cost savings these standards could bring about. Instead, they derided the standards as “Socialist” and promised to stamp them out, as the Tea Party usually does with regulations that promote public transit, mixed use development, and alternatives to driving.

In reversing these development guidelines, the State of Virginia has shown that it is willing to ignore facts, sacrifice economic development, public safety, the environment, and the well being of its citizens in order to score political points. This is something that should not be allowed to happen.

On United Nations Agenda 21

Anyone who is somewhat familiar with current issues in planning has mostlikely heard of UN Agenda 21, something most often brought to discussion by NIMBYists and the right wing skeptic who fear a takeover of the United States by the UN or a world government conspiracy.

But what actually is it? Is it a set of binding guidelines that member nations are required to follow, or is it simply the recognition of a problem?

The Agenda is composed of 27 principles which highlight various economic and environmental goals which communities should strive for in order to be considered “sustainable”. Special attention is paid to developing countries and to womens' rights. The Agenda is silent on enforcement of these issues, and states that it is the right of nations to exploit their natural resources at will.  

Thus, it is simply the recognition of the problem of development on the environment, much the same way that warning labels on packs of cigarettes and bottles of alcohol are recognitions of the health problems they cause.

However, the Agenda promotes a skewed view of the issue of urban development. The word “environment” is mentioned forty times throughout the course of the article, whereas the word “economic” is only mentioned four times. Thus, the Agenda promotes the idea of New Urbanism from the typical environmentalist perspective, rather than taking a broader, all inclusive view and including economic and social arguments.

This perspective serves to isolate people of other political views who would otherwise support many issues raised for New Urbanism, as stated in an earlier post.