Smart Growth America
published the first national study to establish
a direct association between the form of the community and the health of the
people who live there... over a decade ago. The report that was also
covered by BBC, the New York Times, USA Today, and NPR confirms the adverse
relationship between urban sprawl and physical activity, obesity, and
morbidity. The results are not surprising. Here's what we found out:
- people living in counties marked by sprawling
development are likely to walk less and weigh more than people who live in
less sprawling counties
- sprawling counties are more likely to suffer from high
blood pressure
- the results hold true for factors of age, education,
gender, race, ethnicity
- people in sprawling areas are missing out on
significant health benefits that are available simply by walking, biking,
climbing stairs, and being active as a part of everyday life
- 55 percent of Americans would like to walk more instead
of driving;
- 52 percent would like to bike more
Now, onto
the shocking part: We've been building, are building, and will continue to
build communities - and not just ex-urban, but places we classify as cities -
that prove detrimental to our health (think of many southeastern cities, like Atlanta). Instead we should be putting limits to
our growth and thinking about maximizing space and becoming as efficient as
possible. There are several reasons to do so besides the health benefits; less
reliance on automobiles as well as the non-renewable fuel sources that come
with transportation, conservation and preservation of land and habitat, the
ability to create a more localized economy, closer-knit communities, etc. For
starters that means less parking lots which is essentially dead space that
promote driving. It's alarming that in some cities parking space covers a third of the land area,
becoming such a dominant feature of our built environment that it has started
to define it. Such dull environments obstruct our motivation and creativity.
Limiting growth also means establishing city limits, mixed-use zoning
regulations, transit-oriented development, narrow streets, and not just dense but compact
development.
While
American cities may not have much on our European counterparts, below are the
10 cities with the largest share of their populations in functional urban cores
(most compact), and they may compare the closest. It wouldn't come as a
surprise if some of these cities were also the most fit.
1. New York City (97.3 percent)
2. Buffalo (94.5 percent)
3. San Francisco (94.0 percent)
4. Boston (89.7 percent)
5. Hartford (87.4 percent)
6. Providence (86.5 percent)
7. St. Louis (84.1 percent)
8. Minneapolis (83.5 percent)
9. District of Colombia (83.4 percent)
10. Philadelphia (83.4 percent)
These should
be the years for compact growth, urban infill, core renewal. How much
containment and smart growth is possible? Hopefully the possibilities are not
endless - at least spatially. But it all starts with a plan.
_________
Sources & Links:
