Introduction
The intent of this paper is to offer a summary of two articles, which include The Sprawl Debate and the Principles of New Urbanism principles. The matter should not be a federal concern for land-use, is localized. Over many years, the Americans have been moving to both suburban and personal communities. This is an adequate indication of the constitutional rights to travel. The Americans move due to one sole purpose, which relate to the sprawl matters. The Americans want to have full control of their properties.
Summary of “The Sprawl Debate”
As a point of departure, the desire of the American people to regulate personal property is at the odds with the land developers whose agenda is to impose controls attributed to the use of land and growth controls. In reference to the planners’ arguments over this sprawl issue, they assert that, there is an urgent and staid need to control urban sprawl. However, the author disregards the planner’s ideas of imposing the controls based on their experimental weakness. The planner’s argument does not reflect any economic soundness since, the broader perspective on the ideas, tend to suggest that, the control development should be embraced everywhere through the state and federal regulations. The underlying principle on the sprawl spread is attributed to increased rate of affluence. According to the author of this article, this is completely impractical and unattainable. The author asserts that sprawl will remain a concern, which needs both the local and the state authorities to stop engaging in an endless struggle, forge ways of achieving a way of accommodating each other, and resolves the issue in an amicable way.
Summary of the “Principles of New Urbanism principles”
On other hand, the article on the Principles of New Urbanism principle articulates on the principles of Urbanism. They include walkability, connection, assorted use and Diversity, Variegated housing, superior architecture and Urban Design. In the case of the excellent architecture and urban design, the author believes that, if the towns and cities are well designed, they will accommodate numerous people (McDonald, 36). As observed in the article The Sprawl Debate, the major cause of sprawl issues is the increasing rate of affluence, it is expected to continue hence, the movement of people to the suburbs and other areas in town, and cities will continue. Therefore, the principles of Urbanism need to be followed to ensure a reduced problem of sprawl. However, it should be noted that, the land planners who are supposed to embrace this suggestion believe that, control development should be embraced everywhere through the state and federal regulations.
Gordon and Richardson differ with the new Urbanism on the issue of farmland preservation. In the case of the new urbanists, low-density suburban domestic expansion is taking up land that is prime for agriculture. However, Gordon and Richardson argue that, the USA investment in agriculture was at its highest in the 1930s and later adoption of the most lucrative and land intensive crops sustained the venture since then. Gordon and Richardson estimates that the urbanization takes up to a maximum of only 5% of the land and not as the new Urbanist claim.
In conclusion, the articles focus on the ways in which the sprawl and urbanization issue can be solved and ensure that the American people are at peace within urban centers.However, both of them differ with the stringent policies suggested by the land planners. They argue that, the suggestions made by the land planners have no space in the modern America.
Work Cited
Stefanus lbertus Myburgh McDonald. Risk in Mixed-Use Property development n South Africa. A case Study of Melrose Arch. 2010. Print
