Economic Analysis
![Picture](/uploads/1/6/6/9/16696188/990547046.jpg?254)
Extreme urban sprawl in a major city
Land is a public good used for sprawling residential areas. Although there is no private exploitation of this land, that does not make this problem any less severe, some argue. On a public scale, the cost is extremely high, especially in the most developed suburban areas. For example, in Orlando, FL, and the sprawling areas that surround it, it will cost the city $15.84 billion to pave new roads and $8.8 billion to maintain their water/sewage system in the next 20 years. The total taxpayer bill? $157.7 billion, or about $44,955 per person. If these costs are this awful in Orlando, imagine what they are in larger cities like Los Angeles, Phoenix, or Las Vegas, three of America's top ten sprawling cities.
Many people possess the incentive to help improve the conditions of urban sprawl, including scientists, economists, water planners, foresters, coastal communities, and zoning companies. The people causing the problem have an incentive to improve the conditions as well. As previously mentioned, suburban areas do not provide the best tourist attractions. Once people who run these cities start to see the negative effects of less and less tourism every year, they might start to reconsider letting more land be developed. As a result of this, people in charge of zoning laws might start to reconsider forbidding mixed land uses once they see how much revenue a combination of commercialism and residential areas brings to cities. This, in turn, will give residents who drive everywhere and, in the process, emit exhaust into the air, an incentive to walk when they need to go somewhere because their destination would be a short distance away. This also helps communities to grow closer together.
In order to physically fix the problem, sprawl needs to be repaired, remodeled, and transformed into communities where residents are able to thrive together and support each other. If developers in sprawling areas have no incentives to fix them, a solution might be found if cities come together and use incentives themselves to find a solution. Some successful examples of this can be found when Portland, OR, used green belts to constrain development, and when Minneapolis and St. Paul started to share their tax base revenue.
Many people possess the incentive to help improve the conditions of urban sprawl, including scientists, economists, water planners, foresters, coastal communities, and zoning companies. The people causing the problem have an incentive to improve the conditions as well. As previously mentioned, suburban areas do not provide the best tourist attractions. Once people who run these cities start to see the negative effects of less and less tourism every year, they might start to reconsider letting more land be developed. As a result of this, people in charge of zoning laws might start to reconsider forbidding mixed land uses once they see how much revenue a combination of commercialism and residential areas brings to cities. This, in turn, will give residents who drive everywhere and, in the process, emit exhaust into the air, an incentive to walk when they need to go somewhere because their destination would be a short distance away. This also helps communities to grow closer together.
In order to physically fix the problem, sprawl needs to be repaired, remodeled, and transformed into communities where residents are able to thrive together and support each other. If developers in sprawling areas have no incentives to fix them, a solution might be found if cities come together and use incentives themselves to find a solution. Some successful examples of this can be found when Portland, OR, used green belts to constrain development, and when Minneapolis and St. Paul started to share their tax base revenue.