The reasons anti-sprawl advocates cite for wanting to reign in urban expansion vary from economic to social to environmental. Advocates sometimes hide that they feel shopping centers and subdivisions are just plain ugly, but visiting researcher, professor and author Bob Bruegmann sees sprawl differently.
Here to speak at Case - the historian takes issue with aspects of the argument that unchecked growth is destroying the landscape, especially in large, older cities like Cleveland.
Bob Bruegmann: These cities were very often not pleasant places to live if you didn't have a lot of money, so they're using the one natural asset that Cleveland, or any other of these cities has, which is a lot of land - so people have spread out. It has in many ways saved these places in that a lot of middle class people are still here, and haven't moved elsewhere because they could move out and get a lot of land very cheaply.
The University of Illinois-Chicago professor says Cleveland is portrayed as the worst case of sprawl in the country because our metropolitan population is shrinking while the percentage of new land consumption matches the rest of America. But he also what's still here, makes the future far from bleak.
Bob Bruegmann: If you're really successful in one era, and Cleveland was spectacularly successful late 19th early 20th century - then you're going to go through an economic restructuring, which is always difficult. I think Cleveland did that in the 60's, 70's, the 80's, I think the corner was actually turned in Cleveland some time ago, and although it looks very slow, the rebuilding of the central city and the revitilation of the economy generally, I think it's underway. So it'll come roaring back; there's no question about it - it's just a matter of time.
Rick Jackson, 90.3.