Counter urbanisation - what steps are local authorities taking to stop this, example: New York?

Question

Title of essay: What is counter urbanisation? Give an example of a place where Counter Urbanisation is occuring. Describe the reasons for it and ways to stop people leaving your named area.

I've done most of it. My teacher told us to write on New York and just apply what we learnt on London to there. I want to find out ways of stopping people moving out of the city as we didnt learn this. I can make some things up that seem logical, but i'd like to write some things that are actually being done in cities with this problem.

Anyone know anything?

Also, does anyone know anywhere i can get some good facts and figures that are relevant.

Answer 1

As the previous poster stated, this is called "urban sprawl" in the United States.  New York probably has the worst urban sprawl in the country, at least judging by commuting time, if not by its rapidity.  

What local authorities are doing: nothing.  If anything, local authorities PROMOTE urban sprawl, by means shown below.

Here are some of the reasons for urban sprawl in the US:

1.  Real estate boom accompanied by generous tax cuts for home ownership, regardless of whether it's the purchaser's principal residence or an investment.  Result: proliferation of half-empty luxury high rises in Manhattan and the disappearance of affordable housing for the middle class.

2.  Levittown culture.  The economic ideal for most American families is to own a home -- a "home" being a one- two- or three-story structure with at least a nominal backyard and front lawn.  Most Americans (that I know) believe it is impossible to raise a family in an apartment, no matter how modern, spacious and amenity-laden it is; gotta have a house.  Needless to say, this represents an EXTREMELY inefficient use of land.  Think about it: stacking 300 families in a high rise takes up a much smaller area than spreading 300 single-family houses on the ground.  That's why that American Dream -- the house -- comes with a bonus: the 2-hour commute (one way).

3.  Reactionary, NIMBY-inspired, anti-Social, or just plain stupid zoning laws and deed covenants.  (NIMBY: Acronym for Not In My Back Yard.)  We are a country of local laws.  Contrary to what many people outside the US believe, the federal government is a government of limited powers.  Land use is almost entirely in the hands of not just states -- but local municipalities and even individual developers.  These banish stores, schools, hospitals into specially designated areas and prohibit certain activities on residential properties which have the effect of adding more roads, strip malls, etc.  In particular, not only don't local authorities do anything to bring jobs closer to their residents -- they often do everything in their power to keep employers away.  That's what "residential-only" zones are for.

4.  A vicious cycle.  That house in the suburbs comes with at least 2 cars -- AT LEAST.  More cars means more roads.  More roads means more Levittowns.  More Levittowns means more cars.  And so forth and so on, ad infinitum.

Answer 2

In America we call it urban sprawl what is happening and I am concerned that very few communities are really confronting the problem.

In the United States part of the problem is the vast diversity of laws, the lax enforcement of any existing laws, the lack of urban planning, and the strength of the Chambers of Commerce including the National Chamber of Commerce.  Americans are so very sold on letting the free market or market forces determine the outcome of things that we are in danger of destroying the countryside and letting suburbia fester and decay as well as the inner city.