Increased obesity[edit]The American Journal of Public Health and the American Journal of Health Promotion, have both stated that there is a significant connection between sprawl, obesity, and hypertension.[36] Many urbanists argue that this is due to less walking in sprawl-type developments. Living in a car centered culture forces inhabitants to drive everywhere, thus walking far less than their urban (and generally healthier) counterparts.[37]
Decrease in social capital[edit]Urban sprawl may be partly responsible for the decline in social capital in the United States. Compact neighborhoods can foster casual social interactions among neighbors, while sprawl creates barriers. Sprawl tends to replace public spaces with private spaces such as fenced-in backyards.[4]
...
Increased infrastructure costs[edit]Living in larger, more spread out spaces generally makes public services more expensive. Since car usage becomes endemic and public transport often becomes significantly more expensive, city planners are forced to build highway and parking infrastructure, which in turn decreases taxable land and revenue, and decreases the desirability of the area adjacent to such structures. Providing services such as water, sewers, and electricity is also more expensive per household in less dense areas.[38]
Increased personal transportation costs[edit]Residents of low-density areas spend a higher proportion of their income on transportation than residents of high density areas.[39] The RAC estimates that the average cost of operating a car in the UK is ?5,000 a year, most of which stems from financing costs and depreciation.[40] In comparison, a yearly underground ticket for a suburban commuter in London (where the average wage is higher than the national average[41]) costs ?1,000-1,500, which, because of subsidies, do not cover financing for the rail or depreciation of the infrastructure. In the Euro-15, rail transit requires $69 billion euro in subsidies while road transportation nets $107 billion euro in additional taxes.[42]
Neighborhood quality[edit]Critics of sprawl maintain that sprawl erodes quality of life. Duany and Plater-Zyberk believe that in traditional neighborhoods the nearness of the workplace to retail and restaurant space that provides cafes and convenience stores with daytime customers is an essential component to the successful balance of urban life. Furthermore, they state that the closeness of the workplace to homes also gives people the option of walking or riding a bicycle to work or school and that without this kind of interaction between the different components of life the urban pattern quickly falls apart. (Duany Plater-Zyberk 6, 28). James Howard Kunstler has argued that poor aesthetics in suburban environments make them "places not worth caring about", and that they lack a sense of history and identity.