# Rural Sprawl



## tvdxer (Feb 28, 2006)

As the Hummer is to the Suburban is to the Escape, so is rural sprawl to the "exurbs" to the inner-ring suburbs.

The Duluth - Superior area has a particularly large amount of this. Small-time developers subdivide land into five-acre (about 20,000 m^2) plots and build small, usually gravel-surfaced roads off the county highway grid:

http://g.co/maps/6gevs

http://g.co/maps/w87qc

http://g.co/maps/h3r9j

These homes and the land they are on do not sell for much more than an equivalent home in the city, while still being somewhat convenient to city amenities (about a 20-30 minute drive from shopping and businesses). They usually are off the city's water and gas grids, and therefore require wells, septic tanks, and diesel furnaces. 

Residents of such "developments" often have pole buildings on their land in addition to their home and garage, where they store four-wheelers, snowmobiles, boats, jet-skis, and lawnmowers in, or have hobby workshops:


30x36x12 DIY Pole Barn by DIY Pole Barns, on Flickr 

Residents rely on private vehicles for all needs, often commuting several miles to the nearest gas station / convenience store. 4 x 4 Trucks and SUVs are useful for when the access roads or even the highways are snowed in or icy.

How common are such developments on the outskirts of YOUR city? Do people like to live this way in your country? Many people love this way of life around here.


----------



## Sonrise (Oct 20, 2009)

Isn't your thread title, by definition, an oxymoron? :nuts:


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

I truly love the idea. Those lots are big, the environmental impact is minimum and it provides plenty of space for those that don't mind being "not within walking distance" of anything!


----------



## BringMe (May 7, 2011)

Just another reason for me to keep hating sprawl


----------



## Kensingtonian (Nov 8, 2008)

tvdxer said:


> How common are such developments on the outskirts of YOUR city? Do people like to live this way in your country? Many people love this way of life around here.


In Toronto I never knew anyone who wanted this way of life. Now I'm in Ottawa and it seems like living in a rural area within commuting distance to the city a common goal. People in Ottawa brag about how close to nature their home is while people in Toronto brag about how close to downtown their home is.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

In most places round here you wouldn't get planning permission for new greenbelt development like this on big lots in the middle of the countryside. Your best bet would be to buy an existing rural farmhouse or something like that which people do if they want this lifestyle.


----------



## SydneyCity (Nov 14, 2010)

There's a few developments like this surrounding Sydney, with big houses on small acreage plots.


----------



## NDB (Mar 23, 2012)

Suburbanist said:


> I truly love the idea. Those lots are big, the environmental impact is minimum and it provides plenty of space for those that don't mind being "not within walking distance" of anything!


Actually the impact is far from being minimum. They take huge amounts of land, and require very high fuel consumption. It looks minimum just because there are not many people living this way and they are very sparse.

It's awesome to live in the countryside, but I wouldn't like to have to drive several miles every day just to get to the nearest... something.


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

The whole Belgian landscape has arisen like this. People flocking from the cities building a nice home in the rural landscape(altough proces are higher and lots are smaller). result: Rural has become suburban with rural landscape scattered throughout. It's a whole differend looking landscape than posted in these pics though.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

joshsam said:


> The whole Belgian landscape has arisen like this. People flocking from the cities building a nice home in the rural landscape(altough proces are higher and lots are smaller). result: Rural has become suburban with rural landscape scattered throughout. It's a whole differend looking landscape than posted in these pics though.


Yep, it is more like houses along a road there in Belgium, not plots converted to residences.


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

Here are some immages of the Belgian rural sprawl. It's basically houses along road mixed with farm companies and fields. It's one big mess actually. Then if you go to main roads you'll find everything from offices to industrial companies along those roads.

Rural sprawl inside the most densly populated area of Belgium:










Rural sprawl inside a less densly populated area:










A zoom in on the sprawl away from the main road. Like you can see houses mixed with farm companies. For European standards, those houses are pretty big and have a nice plot in size.


























http://www.vildaphoto.net/data/php/frontend.actions.php?action=photo-viewphoto&id=15766


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

The North American rural sprawl to compare with the Belgian one:


















http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--IWO7XtzPjc/TdnQMXNG0NI/AAAAAAAACH0/Zh7sUsEDF5I/s1600/Rural_sprawl.jpg









http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3443/3713278989_77876ce08c.jpg


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

Rural sprawl in Mallorca:


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

Something I miss in European rural sprawl are properly designed cul-de-sac


----------



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

The term 'Rural Sprawl' pretty much sums up the whole of England. With 1000+ people per Square mile, there are no empty places. The area around me in Cheshire (South Manchester) is pretty typical of this...

You can see what I mean with the collection of towns/villages which either merge into one, or have loads of houses dotted in between...

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=53.301441,-2.162418&spn=0.070374,0.181789&t=k&z=13


----------



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

Suburbanist said:


> Something I miss in European rural sprawl are properly designed cul-de-sac


Go look at England and Scotland, we are good at cul de sacs  lol

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=53.283462,-2.160262&spn=0.0022,0.005681&t=k&z=18


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

^^That's not really rural though but suburban.


----------



## erka (Apr 26, 2003)

In the Netherlands it's completely the opposite of Belgium and the US in case of rural sprawl. Here it is simply forbidden to build a new home in areas zoned as rural. Rural sprawl = more costs for roads, water/gas and other amenities, more difficult public transport and less efficient agriculture. On top of that, environmental laws forbid to build a new home too close to a farm anyway (unlesss it is a replacement of the existing house).


----------



## tvdxer (Feb 28, 2006)

erka said:


> In the Netherlands it's completely the opposite of Belgium and the US in case of rural sprawl. Here it is simply forbidden to build a new home in areas zoned as rural. Rural sprawl = more costs for roads, water/gas and other amenities, more difficult public transport and less efficient agriculture. On top of that, environmental laws forbid to build a new home too close to a farm anyway (unlesss it is a replacement of the existing house).


With the type of development in the picture, roads are usually gravel, and hence low-maintenance. They're often labeled "private roads", though nobody cares if you bike or walk down them; and they can be atrocious in the winter, so at least one or two heads of household own a pick-up truck with a snow-plow attachment. Amenities are unheard of; the homeowner provides a septic tank for a sewer (or a leeching field), a well for water supply (connected to the home's plumbing system), and a diesel tank which must be filled by one of many heating oil companies for heat. TV is usually satellite. The only utilities that really have to be extended are electricity and phone. 

However, even if such development were to be permitted, I doubt that it'd be popular in NL, for the simple fact that swamp/forest land is much cheaper than prime agricultural land. Undeveloped land is in abundance in NE MN. Farming is difficult due to the short (and unreliable) growing season and perhaps the soils here, so there's really not much use for the land except for logging/forestry, hunting, or a cabin / house.


----------



## tvdxer (Feb 28, 2006)

Here are some Bird's Eye Views of the areas I linked to:

http://binged.it/GSTrGm (Looks like he put a motocross track down in his yard)
http://binged.it/GPXf78 (Pretty cool landscaping job on that house surrounded by pines)

Check the scales to see how large the yards are. They're massive.

Building along existing roads is also very common here, and more traditional for "rural/suburban" residences. Here's an example of one of the more "urban" parts of Hermantown. The schools are located a little north of here. The ballpark is at lower left corner of the screen at the junction of Maple Grove Rd. and Ugstad Rd.

http://binged.it/GSUqpV

The Hermantown public schools and surrounding area (this is where I went to school for most of my childhood). The high school is on Hawk Circle Drive; most students drive to school once they get their license, as taking the bus after 15 or 16 is "uncool". The middle school is on Ugstad Rd. and the elementary school is to the southwest of the high school. The hockey rink and administration building is in the center of the schools. Notice the nature trails and sports facilities at the high school. I think this would be Suburbanist's dream. Only about 10 minutes away (down uncongested roads) from a large shopping mall, too. Just don't go 70 mph (110 km/h) in the 50 mph (85 km/h) zone; police enforcement is terrible here. 

http://binged.it/GSVg5S


----------



## BringMe (May 7, 2011)

Who can live like that? For real 

Anyone here likes that?


----------



## tvdxer (Feb 28, 2006)

I do.

I'm torn between it and a more urban style of living.

People here usually make enough money to own and maintain at least two cars, so getting around is not an issue. The latter pictures are situated about 3 miles from a major retail district, so you can simply bike there in the summer, though most people would drive.

Large plots like that give you space for land-hungry hobbies, like amateur radio or horse riding. 

You used to be able to four-wheel or snowmobile right out of your land before most land was posted (around here) on user-made and maintained trails. Can't do that in most (American) cites!

Plus, at the end of the day, most people just want to see their immediate family, so they don't need the "pedestrian" life a city offers. Some people eventually get tired of club-hopping and going to bars and just want a peaceful, tranquil, bucolic life.


----------



## Yuri S Andrade (Sep 29, 2008)

^^
Even in big cities people don't go out that much. In São Paulo, for example, the average person, no matter if it's from lower, middle or upper classes, usually arrives very tired home and prefers to spend time with family, resting. People in SSC usually (especially in the US) are very radical over the suburban/exurban sprawl, making up problems, drawing a line between "us" and "them", which doesn't exist in reality.

Anyhow, quite interesting landscape.


----------



## zaphod (Dec 8, 2005)

In the US it does, and it's more about politics than anything else. People who live in inner cities have a very justified inferiority complex. And to be fair, that's what has motivated so much progress and improvement in the last 2 decades.



> Plus, at the end of the day, most people just want to see their immediate family, so they don't need the "pedestrian" life a city offers. Some people eventually get tired of club-hopping and going to bars and just want a peaceful, tranquil, bucolic life.


Exactly, which is why I like being able to lock the door to my apartment behind me, do some laundry, and more or less be done. Not clear brush or shovel snow off the road.

But no seriously I am glad for you or anyone else who has found a way to live and be happy the way they want. I guess one benefit to living in a rural sprawl environment is you'd be able to pursue hobbies or start a business out in a metal shed on your property. That seems pretty common where I am from, small auto shops and places that sell local food items(honey, butchers, pecan sellers, etc) are going to be out of town.


----------



## erka (Apr 26, 2003)

tvdxer said:


> However, even if such development were to be permitted, I doubt that it'd be popular in NL, for the simple fact that swamp/forest land is much cheaper than prime agricultural land. Undeveloped land is in abundance in NE MN. Farming is difficult due to the short (and unreliable) growing season and perhaps the soils here, so there's really not much use for the land except for logging/forestry, hunting, or a cabin / house.


That is right, every inch of our country that is not urban or water is prime agricultural land, and the few remaining nature reserve areas are almost always protected by law. On the other hand, suburban land value (per square meter) is about 100-200 times the agricultural land value.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

BringMe said:


> Who can live like that? For real
> 
> Anyone here likes that?


I do. It's like a dream to live in a place like that.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

erka said:


> On the other hand, suburban land value (per square meter) is about 100-200 times the agricultural land value.


Similar here, agricultural land with no foreseeable chance of planning permission for anything else = £10,000 - £20,000 per hectare (£1=$1.60) depending on quality; agricultural land with residential planning permission = anything from £600,000 - £5,000,000 per hectare depending where in the country it is.

So landowners can make enormous windfall profits by achieving a change of status, even after paying capital gains tax on it.


----------



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

BringMe said:


> Who can live like that? For real
> 
> Anyone here likes that?


I guess I like in the English version of that. North East Cheshire. I live in a large house, on a road that has a lot of trees, and all my neighbours live in large houses. We shop either at the Trafford Centre, or Handford Dean/Lyme Green and can only get around by car (unless you want to walk for 20mins to the train station). I don't mind it, if you can drive its fine. 30mins to Manchester city centre aswell and 10mins to Manchester Airport


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

^^ I think that's more the UK equivalent of wealthy large suburban homes in the US (though separated from the urban area by green belt rather than more suburbia). 

I don't think its the same as the low-budget, small-time self-employed rural sprawl the OP was talking about.


----------



## tvdxer (Feb 28, 2006)

Jonesy55 said:


> ^^ I think that's more the UK equivalent of wealthy large suburban homes in the US (though separated from the urban area by green belt rather than more suburbia).
> 
> I don't think its the same as the low-budget, small-time self-employed rural sprawl the OP was talking about.


Exactly.

The "rural sprawl" around here seems to be socio-economically diverse. I sense that the new developments attract young middle-class families, while those who live off existing county highways and gravel roads range from alcoholics and junkies to normal workers to wealthy professionals. However, the latter seem more likely to live in closer-in, intentional developments with city amenities. 

They attract anybody who wants a lot of land and freedom to do with it as they please. You'll notice that the interior of county roads (which are aligned on 1 x 1 mile grid) are largely undeveloped. Until recently, much of the land around here was unposted, which meant that you could (if I understood rightly...)) ride four-wheelers or snowmobiles or dirt bikes or hunt or do pretty much anything on it, even if it was owned by a private party. We had a blast riding four-wheelers at a large gravel excavation pit with temporary ponds, steep hills, and depressions until the former owner's son took over and kicked us out. Law enforcement is sparse, so one could ride unlicensed on dirt and even paved roads with little fear of consequences. Two-stroke motorbikes used to be a common sound here.


----------



## AmoreUrbs (Mar 6, 2013)

A big part of the Irish countryside, just like many parts of Italy, is typical of these developments in the "middle of nothing":
Irish "countryside" somewhere outside Dublin: 








Taken from street level (somewhere outside Cork!):









It's interesting to compare it to Britain where such developments are severely forbidden; otherwise the developments on regular and planned sprawl are similar in both countries (but more widespread in Ireland it seems); Northern Ireland is also very similar to ROI, albeit part of UK proper.. I guess it has to do with both densities (much lower in Ireland) and (too) permissive laws


----------



## Yuri S Andrade (Sep 29, 2008)

^^
How does Britain manage to forbid such developments? They don't grant permission for construction?


----------



## AmoreUrbs (Mar 6, 2013)

Yuri S Andrade said:


> ^^
> How does Britain manage to forbid such developments? They don't grant permission for construction?


Britain has a tough planned sprawl policy, so you can not build what you want wherever you want (although exceptions for the rich or very rich I guess are there); even the architecture of the suburban developments is not individualistic (and a bit dull sometimes); some years ago some seem to have tried to build some countryside houses, as there's some rural developments, but it stopped soon it seems (I suppose as soon as legislations came on the matter).. Also, UK has a much higher density compared to Ireland, it'd be catastrophic if they'd leave people build countryside houses everywhere (sprawl is more than enough); UK has been at the head of industrial revolution, and that created a huge population (63 millions atm), while Ireland (ROI) which is more or less a 1/3 the size of UK, has only less than 5 millions people, and only one "big city", Dublin


----------



## 009 (Nov 28, 2007)

I personally find sprawl very boring, but in the middle of nowhere is better than in a city.

I think there is a big divide on how people view sprawl, people from highly developed nations usually see it as boring, while those from developing countries often seem to think of it as a sign of progress.

When I see people from Europe, North America, etc posting pics of their cities, they usually post historical things, CBDs, etc, while people from developing countries frequently post lots of pictures of the few rich neighborhoods in the suburbs with large detached houses


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

> It's interesting to compare it to Britain where such developments are severely forbidden;


Yes. Although the landscape is very similar to Britain, it is easy to tell that aerial shot is not the UK. If it was the houses would be clustered in one corner of the shot, with half a dozen or so outlying farms.


----------



## VITORIA MAN (Jan 31, 2013)

basque country , spain


----------



## VITORIA MAN (Jan 31, 2013)

in castilla (e)


----------



## VITORIA MAN (Jan 31, 2013)

andalucia (E)


----------



## VITORIA MAN (Jan 31, 2013)

galicia (E)


----------



## castermaild55 (Sep 8, 2005)

scroll>>>>









http://sea.ap.teacup.com/nikkeif/img/1249357634.jpg


----------

