Up Above: The Geography
of Suburban Sprawl
in Southern Californias Antelope Valley
Matthew Jalbert
Not Learning Lessons of the Past
LOOKING AT THE GROWTH IN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY
and its connection to Los Angeles, one can not help but wonder:
what are the limits of the Los Angeles metropolis? The Antelope
Valley is a fifth generation outlier of Los Angeles. Will
there be a sixth? A seventh? What should alarm us about developments such
as the Antelope Valley is that the patterns identified as unsustainable
and even destructive continue to be repeated. The lessons of sprawl go
unlearned because those who learn the lessons hardest (the residents who
endure its fragmentation and dislocation) are not its promotersnamely,
landowners and real estate developers.
Despite the recognition of automobile traffics
many negative effects in Los Angeles, the Antelope Valley developed as a
typical automobile commuter suburb. With its U.S. survey-gridded streets,
the Valley is vast and has few recognizable centers. The pattern of development
in the 1980s furthered sprawl throughout the Antelope Valley: developers
often built subdivisions several miles from other developments, forcing
the cities to annex the intervening land. Subdivisions were thus isolated,
by distance as well as by cinder block walls.
Virtually everything city planners know about bad design found outlet
in the boom years. Why? Because the economic efficiencies of traditional
suburban sprawl served the interests of the developers. All the lessons
in the world could not have applied to growth in the Antelope Valley,
because those with the vision to guide development were not vested with
the capacity to do so. Consequently, the Antelope Valleys growth
is best described as developer-planned on the subdivision level. Each
subdivision came about as its own node, oblivious to the cultural and
environmental milieu in which it was sited.
One of the consequences of this is an increased propensity to flooding.
As the desert surface is paved and built over, large areas of land are
made impermeable. Rainwater that once percolated down to aquifers now
slides off roads and rooftops to collect in gutters and culverts. With
no outlet to the sea, all the water that falls in the Antelope Valley
and the surrounding mountains collects on the Valley floor, while a decrease
in permeable surfaces has resulted in a dangerous increase in surface
runoff. Coupled with a lack of any coordinated flood control plan, the
Antelope Valley has developed itself into a position of extreme flood
vulnerability. This could have been minimized had the areas governments
made a greater effort to implement a regional flood control plan before
development was entrenched.
Another way in which the Antelope Valley seems not to be learning is
in the design of its single-family homes. Despite todays small average
family size, new homes in the Antelope Valley are bigger than theyve
ever been. Compared to the 1950s low ranch-house designs, the developments
of the 1980s typically feature stucco homes on a scale that would have
been considered extravagant in earlier decades. These voluminous homes
can only be considered wasteful, most critically in terms of energy consumption
for heating and cooling. Their building has undoubtedly consumed a disproportionate
share of natural and capital resources for the numbers of people to whom
they provide benefits (figs. 18, 19).
Despite the ecological and social consequences of the single-family
home as it proliferated in the Antelope Valley, it is clear that the financial
incentives were there to encourage their building. Since the Great Depression,
the policies of the Federal government through the Federal Housing Administration
have promoted the construction of suburban single-family homes and the
resultant population dispersal. Decade after decade of home building,
particularly after World War II, has resulted in a sheet of single-family
homes around every American city. The Antelope Valley is just the latest
example of this. The tax advantage of buying a home, in the form of mortgage
deductions, constitutes one of the major financial incentives for the
consumer. So important is this point that Kaufman and Broad provides a
pamphlet to potential buyers, detailing the tax advantages of home ownership
(fig. 20). Thus, the most effective way of guiding development toward
economic and environmental soundnessthrough financial incentivesis
slanted toward the perpetuation of sprawl. Until the financial structures
which promote suburban sprawl are changed, we can reasonably expect that
alternatives will remain available only to a small minority of homebuyers.
NEXT | Social Friction
and Crime
© Matthew Jalbert 19952002
|