A 2014 study by Smart Growth America and the University of Utah’s Metropolitan Research Center calculated a “Sprawl Index score” to 221 metropolitan areas and 994 counties in the United States and found that individuals living in compact, connected metro areas have greater economic mobility and better health, safety, and life span than areas with sprawl. The study, Measuring Sprawl 2014, updates an earlier 2002 study that examined the costs and benefits of sprawl development. From the 2014 study’s Executive Summary:
Some places in the United States are sprawling out and some places are building in compact, connected ways. The difference between these two strategies affects the lives of millions of Americans.
In 2002, Smart Growth America released Measuring Sprawl and Its Impact, a landmark study that has been widely used by researchers to examine the costs and benefits of sprawling development. In peer-reviewed research, sprawl has been linked to physical inactivity, obesity, traffic fatalities, poor air quality, residential energy use, emergency response times, teenage driving, lack of social capital and private-vehicle commute distances and times.
Measuring Sprawl 2014 updates that research and analyzes development patterns in 221 metropolitan areas and 994 counties in the United States as of 2010, looking to see which communities are more compact and connected and which are more sprawling. Researchers used four primary factors—residential and employment density; neighborhood mix of homes, jobs and services; strength of activity centers and downtowns; and accessibility of the street network—to evaluate development in these areas and assign a Sprawl Index score to each. This report includes a list of the most compact and most sprawling metro areas in the country.
This report also examines how Sprawl Index scores relate to life in that community. The researchers found that several quality of life factors improve as index scores rise. Individuals in compact, connected metro areas have greater economic mobility. Individuals in these areas spend less on the combined cost of housing and transportation, and have greater options for the type of transportation to take. In addition, individuals in compact, connected metro areas tend to live longer, safer, healthier lives than their peers in metro areas with sprawl. Obesity is less prevalent in compact counties, and fatal car crashes are less common.
Finally, this report includes specific examples of how communities are building to be more connected and walkable, and how policymakers at all levels of government can support their efforts.
The report included Sprawl Indexes for 17 Maryland Counties. A higher number indicates more compact, Smart Growth-style development and a lower number indicates a higher level of sprawl. Baltimore City had the highest score (191) followed by Montgomery (128) and Baltimore Counties (119). Queen Anne’s (72), Calvert (87) and Somerset (87) Counties received the lowest rankings.
2010 Data and Analysis Used For Measuring Sprawl 2014 Study
2002 Measuring Sprawl and Its Impact Study
A September 3 Sustainable City Network article offers additional perspective from individuals involved with the study:
“Smart growth strategies are about making life better for everyone in a community,” said Geoff Anderson, president and CEO of Smart Growth America. “If policymakers are looking for ways to lower costs for their constituents, improve public health and support their broader economy, they need to be thinking about how to improve their development.”
“This is the most extensive study to date to define and measure the costs and benefits of sprawl development,” said Reid Ewing, director of the University of Utah’s Metropolitan Research Center and primary author of the research. “We found that in areas with less sprawl—several quality of life factors were more positive, including greater economic mobility, lower combined costs of housing and transportation and higher life expectancies. This research demonstrates the many ways our development decisions may impact us every day, and informs how better development practices may improve our quality of life.”
“This report will have a strong influence on the next decade of research concerning relationships between the built environment, urban planning, and health both in the U.S. and worldwide,” said David Berrigan of the National Institutes of Health, which sponsored the research. “Dr. Ewing’s focus on urban sprawl as a modifiable environmental factor correlated with obesity, physical activity and environmental exposures is an important example of renewed efforts to align changes in planning with public health goals and to place these decisions on a stronger and more evidence based footing.”
