60.00% - If you want to protect forests and open land, live in a city — every urban resident is a person not clearing trees for a cul-de-sac.
40.00% - Low-density sprawl consumes enormous land per household, requires car ownership for basic mobility, and is expensive to serve — pull growth back toward existing urban areas where we can.
Concentrating population in cities is more efficient per capita than dispersing it across suburbs.
50.00% - Low-density sprawl consumes enormous land per household, requires car ownership for basic mobility, and is expensive to serve — pull growth back toward existing urban areas where we can.
50.00% - If you want to protect forests and open land, live in a city — every urban resident is a person not clearing trees for a cul-de-sac.
50.00% - Concentrating population in cities is more efficient per capita than dispersing it across suburbs.
50.00% - A city population occupies far less land than the same population dispersed in suburbs.
0.00% - Nature is more easily preserved by drawing the population toward cities with a smaller geographical footprint per resident.
50.00% - Los Angeles