Michael Lewyn is a professor at Touro University, Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, in Long Island. His scholarship can be found at http://works.bepress.com/lewyn.
Two kinds of sprawl
Once every few semesters, I teach a seminar on "Sprawl and the Law." On the first day of the seminar, I ask students what "sprawl" is. After getting a variety of answers, I reveal the truth: most definitions of sprawl involve one of two separate definitions: <p> "<strong>Where we grow</strong>"- Sprawl as movement from the core to the fringe of a region. </p> <p> "<strong>How we grow</strong>"- Sprawl as development oriented towards drivers as opposed to nondrivers. </p>
The Real Meaning Of The "American Dream"
Both supporters and opponents of the sprawl status quo often refer to suburbia as “The American Dream.” One sprawl-defending organization even calls itself “The American Dream Coalition.”
Why Liability Concerns Should Not Prevent Pedestrian-Friendly Streets
<font size="2"> <p> American commercial streets are often designed almost exclusively for cars; streets are often as many as eight or ten lanes wide, lengthening pedestrian trips and encouraging motorists to drive at speeds unsafe for pedestrians. </p>
Pro-Pedestrian Policies Can Be Pro-Driver Too
<p class="MsoNormal"> Some transportation writers seem to believe that the interests of drivers and those of nondrivers are irreconcilable.<span> </span>For example, I just searched on google.com for websites using the terms “traffic calming” and “anti-automobile” together, and found over 60 such sites.<span> </span>But in fact, the interest of pedestrians in calmer, more walkable streets sometimes intersects (pun intended) with the interests of at least some motorists. </p>
Sprawl: History Or Myth?
A critical review of Robert Bruegmann's book 'Sprawl: A Compact History' asserts that Bruegmann's work exemplifies several common myths about sprawl.