Study: Sprawl Costs Local Governments More
Even when fewer people live in sprawling suburban communities than dense urban communities, one of these settlement types has the benefit of being much cheaper to serve.
New research by Christopher Goodman details the costs of sprawl—in terms of its effect on the bottom line of local governments.
Goodman studied 30 years of public spending at the county level to reveal that compact development is less costly to local governments. Sprawling, spread out development "drives up the cost of providing services, despite fewer being needed to service a relatively smaller population."
An article by Goodman details more of the findings from the study, "The Fiscal Impacts of Urban Sprawl: Evidence From U.S. County Areas," published by the Public Budgeting and Finance journal.
Published on Friday, October 18, 2019 in
Topics
- The Top Urban Planning Books of the Decade
- Apple's Big New Austin Campus Revealed, Breaks Ground
- Thinking About Infrastructure and Housing, Part 2
- 2019 Bicycle Friendly States Rankings Released
- Different Types of Pro-Development Urbanism, Explained
- Canadian Suburb Sets Sights on 'Mobility Orbit'
- How Can Cities Adapt to Rising Temperatures? Change the Weather
- Local Curbed Sites Shut Down in D.C., Seattle, New Orleans, Philadelphia
- Watch: The Effort to End Single-Family Zoning in Minneapolis, Explained
- Air Pollution, Visualized
- Mapping Portland's 'Rose Lane Vision' Bus Priority Program
- New Train Station in North Bay Brings Commuters One Step Closer to S.F.
- Report: 'Racialized Displacement' Followed Rezonings in New York City
- Homebuilders Aren't Keeping Pace With Millennial Demand
- 'Gentle Density' to Save Neighborhoods
- In Defense of Pilot Projects
- The High Cost of Sprawl
- School Proximity and Speeding Tickets: Still Can't Win Safety Improvements
- Queens Losing its Place as a Home for Immigrants
- Sea-Level Rise Report: Bad News for South Florida
