Discuss the impact of the automobile’s rise on urban form during the twentieth century and critically evaluate planning measures used to limit the negative social and environmental aspects Since the rise of the automobile, there have been many dramatic changes to urban form in attempts to accommodate this new mode of transport. Focusing on America and Britain, this discussion considers influences on all scales ranging from reclassification of physical roads to the decentralization of urban cores. The rising social and environmental concerns caused by the increase in vehicle usage include pedestrian safety, residential livability, and environmental deterioration. I have decided to explore this question by considering features that have both affected urban form and also acted as planning measures to limit negative social and environmental impacts, these include motorway developments, the garden city urban planning approach and Greenbelts. With over 15 million units of Ford Motor T sold between 1908 and 1927 (Flink, 2001), urban form was most dramatically influenced in American cities during the correlating time period. Planners began to oppose the conventional Roman-grid layouts, where streets were arranged at perpendicular angles to each other. Rising traffic congestion at intersections placed pressure on city planners to reorganise the structural layout in attempts to liberate these chaotic streets. Pedestrians were heavily victimised by the automobile’s rise as modern highway codes and road systems had not yet been established. “Pedestrians crossed the streets whenever and wherever they chose” (Brown, 2006) and coupled with the fact that automobiles had high-speed potentials; together, this created a dangerous environment for city residents especially in Britain with increasing road accidents (Plowden, 1973; see table 1).

Table 1. Casualties in Britain, (Plowden, 1973) In 1922, the Lippincott traffic study was published that contained the first regional traffic flow data in Los Angeles. Lippincott suggested the widening of existing streets and “new diagonal arteries dedicated only to traffic”, these plans alone would cut across the existing urban fabric dramatically (see figure 1). Eventually, the study led to formations of Major Street Traffic Plans, written by Olmsted, Bartholomew and Cheney from 1929. When implemented, the plans altered urban form in American cities with new openings, extensions and street patterns to reduce barriers to traffic (Roth, 2007).

Figure 1. Proposed Plans for Downtown, Los Angeles
(Traffic Commission of City and County of Los Angeles, 1924)

To an extent, the Major Street Plans and motorways were planning measures to limit social and environmental externalities. “Separating pedestrian, streetcar, and auto traffic” enhanced the form of urban areas and provided an efficient, coordinated street system, for example improved traffic crossings ensured maximum pedestrian safety (Brown, 2006). With the separation of mobility and access, crossings and passageways secured pedestrian safety in high traffic areas. However, with cities serving as “places of innovation and creative hubs of the economy”, it is assumed that the mass population would favour proximity to central business districts (Jacobs, 1961). Considering a lower population residing in outskirt regions and motorway infrastructures encircling cities, consequently, the separation of pedestrian and traffic movements will have insignificant benefits to city dwellers. The motorway may have helped to manage the flow of traffic and reorganize streets through grade separation, but it primarily concerns the safety of pedestrians in outskirt regions. Furthermore, freedoms from congestion within cities allow vehicles to travel at greater speeds; together with commuters driving long distances, the potential for motorist accidents is greater. In reality, the response to the automobile’s rise has proven to create additional social consequences by creating a zone that would likely lead to greater road risks (see figure 3).

Figure 2. M25 (Highways Agency,2011)
Figure 3. Beltway, Washington DC (The Washington Examiner, 2011)
Figure 3. Beltway, Washington DC (The Washington Examiner, 2011)

Although the transfer of traffic to motorways would presumably limit pollution emitted from vehicles in cities, in actuality the gas emissions are being transferred into rural areas and does not limit atmospheric pollution altogether. Infrastructures accommodating long-distance routes promote vehicle usage because destinations “were now accessible by this massive, quick-moving highway” (Washingtonian, 2014). In the long run, with road transport accounting for nearly 25% of global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission (Carbon in Motion 2050, 2010), it can be argued that the provision of new road infrastructures including motorways has contributed to atmospheric pollution greatly. In addition, the motorways have also blamed for affecting human health in local areas; a study has linked traffic pollution to reduced lung performance for people who live within a 500-metre radius (The Guardian, 2007). Based on these arguments, aside from improving infrastructures for 20th century motorists, as a planning measure in itself, motorway developments have not only created another environment for social danger and road accidents, but also directly contributed to health conditions on a local scale and atmospheric pollution on a global scale.

The rising automobile “opened up rural landscapes” (BBC, 2014), so greenbelt policies in the New Towns act were implemented to prevent this. Greenbelt areas protect land around towns and cities because they cannot be developed on. Mathematical studies state that “increasing the width of the greenbelt increases its effectiveness at slowing sprawl” because the wider the greenbelt, the less likely commuters will “jump” the belt to reach services located in urban areas; this prevents sprawl because people are less likely to relocate further than the belt (Environmental Modelling & Software, 2004). However, this argument is only valid if services are centralised in urban areas, if services are also sprawling then the ability to reach them will not be a significant factor when people move away from urban cores. Based on this argument, this measure prevents urban sprawl but is only effective the higher the aesthetic value of the greenbelt, i.e. the greater the width. Aside from limiting rural landscapes from being urbanised by infrastructures for the automobile, the prevention of sprawl will also limit noise and air pollution protecting the natural characteristics of suburbs. Therefore, given that the aesthetics of greenbelt areas are preserved, this planning measure is an effective tool to limit negative environmental aspects caused by the rising automobile.
In conclusion: changes to street physicality, grade separation, modernisation of the Roman grid plan, and regional urban sprawl were the main impacts on urban form in the 20th century. Comparing the planning measures mentioned the motorway developments had contributed least to limit negative impacts. Although faster routes were created for motorists, it led to increases in social dangers instead of prevention. The garden city approach and landscaping techniques provided scenic pleasure and improved social interaction with nature, but were ineffective at protecting environmental landscapes. The greenbelt policy has delivered most efficiently to limit environmental impacts because the negative consequences of urban sprawl are much greater and the measure is still effective today.

Word Count: 1992

Reference List
BBC, (2004). London's 'Great Stink' and Victorian Urban Planning. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/victorian_britain/social_conditions/victorian_urban_planning_07.shtml.
BBC, (2014). BBC - Britain From Above - BBC Archive - Aerial Journeys. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/britainfromabove/archive/.
Bianconi, M. and Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2013). The form and organisation of urban areas, Colin Buchanan & Traffic in Towns’ Town Planning Review. pp.315, 320, 325.
Brown, J. (2006). From Traffic Regulation to Limited Ways, Journal of Planning History. 5th ed. Sage Publications, pp.14,17, 22,23.
Buchanan, C. (1963). Traffic in Towns: A study of Long Term Problems of Traffic In Urban Areas. London: Waterlow & Sons Ltd. London Dunstable, p.10.
Buder, S. (1969). Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Ebenezer Howard: The Genesis of a Town Planning Movement. 1st ed. [ebook] pp.390, 391. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01944366908977258.
Carbon in Motion 2050. (2014). [online] Available at: http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/pubs/reports/Carbon%20in%20Motion-UC-Final.pdf
Environmental Modelling & Software, (2004). Agent-based and analytical modeling to evaluate the effectiveness of greenbelts. Elsevier, pp.1099 - 1108.
Figure 2. M25 encircling London, Highways Agency (2011). [image] Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/highwaysagency/6280793533/in/photostream/.
Figure. 3. Beltway, Washington DC, The Washington Examiner (2011). [image] Available at: http://barreralawfirm.com/2011/02/25/fatal-accidents-on-d-c-beltway-linked-to-three-areas/
Flink, J. (2001). The Automobile Age. 6th ed. London, England: MIT Press, pp.1-3, 38.
Hall, P. (1996). Cities of tomorrow. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, p.133.
Howard, E. (1902). Garden Cities of To-morrow. Swan Sonnenschein & Co., Ltd., pp.9-13.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House, New York.
Plowden, W. (1973). The motor car and politics in Britain. Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp.338,483.
Roth, M. (2007). Concrete utopia: The Development of Roads and Freeways in Los Angeles, 1910 - 1950. pp.40, 135.
Seams, R. (1995). Landscape and Urban Planning: The evolution of greenways as an adaptive urban landscape form. p.70.
Southworth, M. and Ben-Joseph, E. (1997). Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities. Island Press, p.11.
The Guardian, (2007). Living near a motorway damages children's lungs, research reveals. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/jan/26/pollution.transportintheuk.
The Major Traffic Street Plan, (1924). Figure. 1. Proposed Street Openings and Widenings of Downtown, Los Angeles. [image] Available at: http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/trafficplans/1924_traffic_street_plan.pdf.
Tibbalds, F. (2001). Making People Friendly Towns: Improving the Public Environment in Towns and Cities. London: Taylor and Francis.
Traffic Commission of City and County of Los Angeles, (1924). A Major Traffic Street Plan for Los Angeles. Los Angeles, California, p.31.
UK Parliament, (2010). New towns. [online] Available at: http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/towncountry/towns/overview/newtowns/.
Wendt, M. (2009). The Importance of Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) by Jane Jacobs to the Profession of Urban Planning. pp.2,5,6.
Washingtonian, (2014). Interesting Facts and Figures About the Beltway. [online] Available at: http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/the-beltway-turns-50-stuff-you-didnt-know-about-washingtons-infamous-road/