Ok, now I am confused. So it is Britannica that says crime has nothing to do with sprawl and nothing to do with what a development takes in the “look,shape, and density of what we see”?
I'm not sure you clicked on the link but....yes, it explains what sprawl is, in terms of development form. Even San Marco is a form of outward growth and in its form and density would be a suburb in most first tier cities in this country. Yet, I'd doubt even you would refer to it as sprawl. It's a streetcar suburb. So here is what the link actually says:
Urban sprawl, also called sprawl or suburban sprawl, the rapid expansion of the geographic extent of cities and towns, often characterized by low-density residential housing, single-use zoning, and increased reliance on the private automobile for transportation.
Low-density residential housing, single-use zoning and reliance on the private automobile for transportation are the "look, shape and density" or development form, resulting from public policy. Crime doesn't make land single-use zoning. Crime doesn't fund an Outer Beltway or SR 9B. Crime doesn't make a place walkable or pedestrian hostile. Those things are all public policy and infrastructure investment driven.
By the same token, you can have outward growth that is dense, mixed-use and multimodal friendly. That look, shape, density and development form would not necessarily be considered sprawl. A good example is San Marco. It's an early form of suburban growth but with a different look, shape, density level and development form from....say Oakleaf, Bartram Springs or Nocatee.
I guess I would like Britannica to explain the non crime/safety origin of the shape and feel of a gate, code box, or talking to some clown in a Cop costume every time I visit someone off 210
Try walking into a luxury condo tower in Brickell, Manhattan, the Loop or any gated development with security. There will be a similar experience, no matter where it's located or what the density of that area is.
