Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Less Sprawl?

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

Yes, I know it’s primary election day, but a post chewing over those results will have to wait.

In the meantime, here’s at item by Robert Bruegmann in Forbes that says urban sprawl may be waning. Snip:

Even many of the most basic facts usually heard about sprawl are just wrong. Contrary to much accepted wisdom, sprawl in the U.S. is not accelerating. It is declining in the city and suburbs as average lot sizes are becoming smaller, and relatively few really affluent people are moving to the edge. This is especially true of the lowest-density cities of the American South and West. The Los Angeles urbanized area (the U.S. Census Bureau’s functional definition of the city, which includes the city center and surrounding suburban areas) has become more than 25% denser over the last 50 years, making it the densest in the country.

This fact, together with the continued decline in densities in all large European urban areas, coupled with a spectacular rise in car ownership and use there, means that U.S. and European urban areas are in many ways converging toward a new 21st-century urban equilibrium. In short, densities will be high enough to provide urban amenities but low enough to allow widespread automobile ownership and use. The same dynamics are at work in the developing world. Although urban densities there are much higher than anything seen in the affluent West, they are plummeting even faster.

Is this the case in Virginia? I can’t say. But this article seemed a bit contrarian, and just the sort of thing to post while Jim is in God’s country (also known as the Free Republic of Wyoming…or at least it used to be, when the drinking age was 19, fireworks were available just about everywhere and highway speed limits were more suggestions than hard-and-fast rules).

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

23 responses to “Less Sprawl?”

  1. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Key quote from the Forbes article: “A new 21st-century urban equilibrium [in which] densities will be high enough to provide urban amenities but low enough to allow widespread automobile ownership and use.”

    Interesting hypothesis. It’s an idea well worth watching.

    As EMR has pointed out in other contexts, though, we are captive to our data and the definitions of that data. Metropolitan areas may be increasing in density. But the jurisdictions included in the “metropolitan area” may not encompass all the jurisdictions that are functionally part of what EMR calls New Urban Regions. In other words, by not including the Caroline Counties, Culpeper Counties, Front Royals, Frederick Counties, etc., we misunderstand the dynamics at work in the Washington New Urban Region.

    My suspicion: Yes, metropolitan cores are increasing density. Yes, the old suburbs are increasing density. But the outer periphery of development keeps pushing aggressively farther out, with the result that average, region-wide density probably isn’t increasing at all.

  2. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “Sprawl” .. like “Smart Growth” are not meaningful descriptors because almost every person has a different view of what they mean.

    For instance, we often are shown pictures of cheek-by-jowl homes – depticted as Sprawl whereas if you talk to the Sprawl folks – they’ll tell you that the real evil is large lots and that building more units to the acre is … “Smart Growth” .. of course.

    Don’t we need to convince ourselves what it is specifically about Sprawl .. that is harmful?

    Seems like.. we could build as dense as we wanted but if everyone was still driving 50 miles to work – then the problem would not get better – only worse – right?

    Similarily – if a majority of the folks who lived in an exurban community – commuted 50 miles a day from that community to their urban jobs – building denser housing in the exurban community does what … not “Sprawl”?

    I think it is a long … long … conversation before enough people actually can start to agree on some basics concepts and ideas about settlement patterns – benefits and impacts… EMR is the front dog….

  3. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “But the outer periphery of development keeps pushing aggressively farther out, with the result that average, region-wide density probably isn’t increasing at all.”

    How do you know what is increasing and what isn’t, if you keep changing the boundaries of the “region”? Would you say that pollution in the oceans is not more, just because the sea level is rising? As a scientist, this kind of thinking makes me crazy: its as if someone rang a gong inside my head. This is wrong on so many levels.

    It seems perfectly natural to me that, if you increase the density in the original region, people who choose less density will have to create a new region: more places.

    “”Sprawl” .. like “Smart Growth” are not meaningful descriptors because almost every person has a different view of what they mean.”

    Both of these terms were chosen specifically to convey an emotional meaning, not a scientific one. I don’t think we need to discuss the agenda of those that came up with this. If you wanted to throw planning into a turmoil for twenty years, you couldn’t come up with more disruptive phraseology.

    “Seems like.. we could build as dense as we wanted but if everyone was still driving 50 miles to work – then the problem would not get better – only worse – right?”

    There are counties in the US where lots of people drive fifty miles to work, and yet there is no congestion. When I worked in the oil fields, it was amazing. At 5:30 in the morning, there would be nothing but you, the rig, and the elk. At 6:00 dozens of trucks would converge on the work site, seamingly from out of nowhere, since there was nowhere anywhere near there.

    It convinced me that congestion is strictly a function of job density: how far you travel has nothing to do with it.

    “building denser housing in the exurban community does what … not “Sprawl”?”

    No, but at least it does not consume open space quite as fast, and it leaves some room for the jobs, if and when they arrive.

    ———————

    If EMR is the front dog in explaining the situation, then we are in big trouble. He and I agree on some things and disagree on others, but plain speaking clarity isn’t his strong suit.

    I’ve heard some people dismiss him as “a crank”. It is too bad, because there are some good arguments there, but people tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

  4. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Suppose that this is true. Suppose that what Anthony downs and others have said about mass transit is true: we can’t afford it, and it won’t work except in special circumstances. Suppose that, maybe, the social costs of autos are not as high as some claim; that their ideas are captive to their data. And suppose that the flexibility and benefits of autos are under rated.

    Then, if it is true that we are stabilizing around a settlement pattern that maximizes the benefits and minimizes the disbenefits of autos, wouldn’t that be a vindication of free market thinking?

  5. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “…relatively few really affluent people are moving to the edge. “

    I have a hard time with that.

    I have frinds that describe their horses as “my foxhunter”, “my jumper” and “my show horse”. My wife just returned from setting up flower arrangements for a wedding.

    She described the house as having six master bedrooms two kitchens, one of which had a complete set of dual appliances, two game rooms, a gym, a theater, and four porches or decks, a pool and a hot tub.

    The wedding party rented six other homes to house the guests.

    As for Los Angeles, I think it is an anomaly, because it is surrounded by mountains and captive to its water supply. I do think the comment about Europe is correct. Our movie-inspired romantic visions are probably outdated.

    ———————–

    If we are looking for balance, we might well expect to find something that provides some venal urban amenities, and some green space for the soul.

  6. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “It convinced me that congestion is strictly a function of job density: how far you travel has nothing to do with it.”

    let me try to convince you otherwise.

    Have you ever looked at I-95 AADT traffic flow numbers starting in say Fredericksburg and going to the Beltway.

    I starts in Fredericksburg at one number.. and the further north you go on I-95 the higher the traffic volumes until they peak in the NoVa Area.

    Now look at that Fredericksuburg commuter… who is occupying a “footprint” – a slot on the road that by doing so is not available to those who get on the road north of him.

    The longer he stays on the road and occupies that spot – the longer than slot is unavailable – even for NoVa folks who might only be commuting 10 miles rather than 50.

    If the guy from Fredericksburg got off the highway BEFORE he got to that NoVa 10-mile commuter then that slot WOULD be available to him but the Fredericksburg guy does not exit so we add another car to the overall volume.

    This is why .. along I-95 during peak hour – the further you go North (for morning rush hour), the higher the volumes.

    If everyone commuting from Fredericksburg go off at Quantico – then all those folks who commuted north of Quantico would have no more congestion than the Fredicksburg guys south of Quantico.

    Convinced?

    This is why I say that building “dense” .. “Smart-Growth”, “anti-sprawl” in Fredericksburg makes no sense in most of the folks who buy those dense homes – commute to NoVa.

    All you are doing… is freeing up MORE vacant land for even more dense housing that will in turn generate even higher volumes of commuters on I-95.

    Now .. some might argue about some other aspects of Smart Growth but my view is that the twin pinchers of more commuters and more land avaiable for more land development .. to serve more commuters .. far, far outweighs the other supposed benefits of “Smart Growth”

    “Smart Growth” in exurban commuting areas is an oxymoron.

  7. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Nope. Not only nope, but absolutely nope.

    The situation you described is exactly like the one I described. there was nothing anywhere near that oil rig jobsite: everyone drove long distances to get there, and there was not congestion: until you got close to the site.

    There was nothing, until those vehicles converged, from many directions, onto a smaller and smaller space.

    This is why .. along I-95 during peak hour – the further you go North (for morning rush hour), the higher the volumes. Or east on 66, or East out of Maryland on 50.

    It is not the vacant land or vacant land subsumed by housing that causes the congestion on 95. It is the jobsites at the other end.

    “The longer he stays on the road and occupies that spot – the longer than slot is unavailable – even for NoVa folks who might only be commuting 10 miles rather than 50.”

    Nonsense. For 40 out of those fifty miles he is not competing with the inner residents for space for his footprint. The space he occupies in F’burg is of no concern to them. They have the “choice” of leaving their home at the same time he leaves his, in which case they will be in the office and finish their coffee before he gets to Springfield.

    Now suppose everyone from 50 miles out to 25 miles out moves 25 miles closer. All the same footprints will still be ocupied on the way to the same jobsites in Fairfax, and the congestion will be the same. You will have a lot of empty footprints from 25 miles out, but they won’t help a bit. And now, if everyone leaves home at the same time, the situation is worse, not better.

    ———————-

    In my example there was nothing, anywhwere, but suppose there had been a couple of hamlets a few miles away. Congestion at the jobsite would be exactly the same.
    VMT might be less,or maybe not. Those trucks were bringing supplies long distances, just because the supplies got staged closer, in the hamlets, doesn’t mean the total miles traveled is less.

    Now, the drill pipe comes from Houston, the drill mud comes from Pennsulvania, and the seismographic equipment comes from California. Assuming you could pick the spot for your drill rig, no matter where you put it the total mileage is the same. But if you put it in some downtown somewhere, you will have more congestion than in the middle of nowhere.

    Nope. I’m not convinced distance has anything to do with congestion, unless it is the distance from you to the car in front. There are lots of rural areas where people drive long distances without congestion.

    But then, they have this little problem with jobs.

  8. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    Jim should go on vacation more often.

    “Smart Growth” in exurban commuting areas is an oxymoron.

    Good observation. Smart Growth requires balanced, or in EMR language, alpha communities.

    …. [S]tabilizing around a settlement pattern that maximizes the benefits and minimizes the disbenefits of autos, wouldn’t that be a vindication of free market thinking?

    Yes, It would be both a vindication of free market thinking and of Smart Growth.

    The question is how to get from now to a settlement pattern that minimizes the disbenefits of autos. We call for development chosen for balanced communities as one step. We call for the elimination of large lot zoning as another. We call for eliminating the parking subsidy for autos and the substitution of transit in high density areas as a third.

    The discussion is dominated by methods to minimize the disbenefits of autos because that is where the free market has broken down and been replaced by a laissez faire market. Minimizing the disbenefits of autos is the low hanging fruit.

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    more fodder:

    “For many workers in the region, however, commuting likely will remain a way of life, adding to its intensifying transportation problems. The Washington area already has one of the most congested traffic systems in the nation, with rush-hour travelers stuck in traffic an average of 69 hours over the course of the year, according to a national study by the Texas Transportation Institute.”

    “In fact, demographers say the Washington and Richmond metro areas are poised to merge. In 2010 or soon after, Richmond could become part of a massive “combined statistical area” that extends from Baltimore through Washington all the way to Petersburg.”

    ““It means that the fate of Richmond and Washington are linked,” says Robert E. Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech in Alexandria. “Housing markets, labor markets, various things that define economic development are related.”

    http://www.gatewayva.com/biz/virginiabusiness/magazine/yr2006/aug06/region1.shtml

    thoughts?

  10. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “more places”, giving away buildings and “alpha” communities:

    “The Army proposes to locate the Asymmetric Warfare Group (ASWG) headquarters in Maryland while keeping the training counterpart operation at Fort AP Hill [Caroline County”

    The BRAC relocation prposal: … 300 professional jobs – relocated …to the greater Fredericksburg region.

    “….the Army cited quality of life issues as the reason to keep ASWG headquarters in Maryland”

    “…the Army expressed concerns over available housing, access to medical care, employment for military spouses and quality of schools.”

    http://www.co.caroline.va.us/apjobs.html

    The Army’s reasons for NOT wanting to locate in Caroline County/Fredericksburg Area are coming from their employee concerns AMD probably a similiar dynamic affects private employers who would prefer to be in the NoVa region rather than the Greater Fredericksburg region.

    The Army agency would be getting free real estate and a free building.. free parking.. and the Army would be picking up the tab for all infrastructure costs – and all they needed to do was move…

    and.. what happened was .. that their 300 employees said – “if you move, we quit”. Does anyone think that other businesses in the Wash Metro area deal with the same issue?

    Ray – do you still believe that giving away buildings will work?

  11. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    Has anyone looked at the school systems?

    This is another quality of life issue that is often overlooked during the “Smart Growth” discussion.

  12. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: schools

    yes. The ones in the Fred Area are not bad.. after all.. the folks who commute to NoVa – some of which used to live in NoVa… send their kids.

    They are not equivalent to Fairfax schools… neither in width nor breadth… less services and less programs…

    The ones in Caroline are not held in high repute even by those in the adjacent jurisdictions…

    If there was going to be – a Regional or State approach to the concept of “more places” or alpha communities, New Urbanism, etc.. then perhaps the one that many NoVa folks already complain about – that NoVa taxes are spent on other jurisdictions schools – should be re-thought.

    I can tell you that the locals are not going to pay more.. School Funding is a dogfight every year and it’s getting worse as we get more and more empty nesters on fixed incomes.

  13. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Sorry to come in late; there has been some illness in the family, we had to get to Cleveland for the game and to several victory parties.

    First, the best thing that can be said about Bruegmann is that he is a “contrarian.”

    His writing appears in print because of the hunger of MainStream Media for “He said / She said” “balanced” journalism that results in passing off error as fact.

    Jim Bacon is right on in his frist comment.

    With as much change as has taken place (and not taken place in other states) in municipal borders, data collection and data definitions in the past 50 years any discussion that is not based on the organic compnents of human settlement is just a meaningless exercise.

    Bacon is right on with respect to the expansion of the frontier of urban activity directly related to the Core of large urban agglomerations.

    He is also right about the changes do to redevelopment as market forces finally overcome municipal, state and federal land use control induced dysfunction.

    The only persons who would question his observations are trying to sell snake oil or have a debiltating case of Geographic Illiteracy and Spacial Ignorance.

    Bruegmann’s generalizations about urban agglomerations in the EU are just as far off base.

    Bruegmann would cite Alex Marshal and his ilk to support his misperceptions. For those who would like to substitute research for ad hominum attacks see Chapter 20 of The Shape of the Future.

    EMR

  14. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Good comments Jim Wamsley.

    All but that last paragraph. That one I have to think about. I’m not blind to the disbenefits, but I’m inclined to think there is a problem with weights. I think a lot of people malign cars while enjoying their benefits.

    I’d like to see it in dollars and cents. ie, I give up 200 sq feet in my house to move 20 miles closer: the cost at 250/sq ft is X, the savings is Y.

  15. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “Ray – do you still believe that giving away buildings will work? “

    I don’t know the whole story on that. I do know the area around A.P. Hill isn’t nearly as quaint as F’burg itself.

    We can play anecdotal evidence for years before we have enough information to call it data. I’m gonna suggest that moving to another state, or across the city is different from moving from Springfield to Dale City.

    I remember when my job moved from Springfield to Gainesville that I wasn’t particularly happy, but I was changing a one mile commute to a 30 mile commute.

    Say I’m living in Springfield and commuting 10 miles to DC. It takes Forty minutes and costs $200 a month. Now I have a choice of relocating my office to Dale City, or Greenbelt. Dale city is 15 minutes the wrong way, and an easy trip. Greenbelt is not do-able, so I quit.

    I don’t know if giving buildings away will work. I don’t hear anything else in the offing that will work any better. TOD will work for some, Congestion pricing will work for some. Smart Growth will work for some. Carpool will work for some.

    Let’s be wildly optimistic and say we solve 50% of the problem that way.

    What so we do with the other million people?

  16. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Has anyone looked at the school systems?

    Yeah, I can’t wait to get my kids into the DC school system.

  17. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    In the article I posted that suggested that Balto-Wash-Fred-Richmond-Petersburg would all morph into a single MSA by 2010….

    it was also suggested that commuter rail connecting all of them..

    The Reality Check exercise in Washington and Fredericksburg both gravitated towards promoting density where the transportation corridors are – road, rail and transit.

    I’m not sure where commuter rail that runs from DC to Richmond “fits” on the alpha/New Urbanism “balanced community” spectrum.

    I think mobility is a little like discovering sex .. and then trying to deny it’s allure….afterwards.

    You can outlaw it.. forbid it.. try to stamp it out.. but at the end of the day – people LIKE mobility…. and they won’t give it up.. unless draconian measures control access rather than the free market.

    …and I don’t think any of us want government performing at that level… in this country.

  18. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    “I’m not sure where commuter rail that runs from DC to Richmond “fits” on the alpha/New Urbanism “balanced community” spectrum.”

    I think this is the third time I have made this point:

    “alpha”
    “New Urbanism”
    “balanced community”

    Are not a “spectrum.”

    As used in this Blog they have each have different meanings.

    “New Urbanism” is a specific view of the way the world should look (and to some extent function) held by New Urbanists. A full outline of the view of New Urbanists can be found by Googleing “Congress of New Urbanism.” As Jim and I have pointed our from time to time there are some good, some inconsistant and some less than logical tenents of New Urbanism. There is a critique of New Urbanism in The Shape of the Future that is titled “Light at the end of the tunnel or just another damn train?”

    By “alpha” I assume you mean “Alpha” as in Alpha Dooryard, Alpha Cluster, Alpha Neighborhood, Alpha Village and Alpha Community. Each has a specific meaning and all are organic components of functional human settlement patterns with each larger component made up of several of the next smaller component.

    By “balanced community” I assume you mean “Balanced Community” which is also termed Alpha (Balanced) Community to make the relationship clear.

    Balanced Communities make up functional and sustainable New Urban Regions.

    None of the Alpha components have any direct relationship to “New Urbanism,” “mixed use developenmt,” or any of the other similar terms.

    For a review of the role of “commuter rail” see our column # 47 “The Commuting Problem” January 2005.

    EMR

  19. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    One other point that ties the words about which you are confused together:

    New Urbanists like to talk about and champion “Transit Oriented Development.”

    An Alpha Village that has at the Centroid of its Core, the platform of a New Urban Region-serving shared vehicle system with a system-wide balance of station-area trip generation and system capacity is the only genuine “Transit Oriented Development.”

    The function of classic “commuter rail” — to pulse in during the AM peak and pulse out during the PM peak is next to imposible to “balance” and thus is a specialty shared-vehicle system that is only functional in conjunction with other systems also serving the same New Urban Region.

    If “commuter rail” has round-the-clock boardings in both direction it becomes an “Intra Urban” system like the “interurban” street cars of the 1920s.

    For example the “villages” in the Mohawk Valley during the 1920s were far more balanced than after 1950. For this reason “interurban” cars opperating between Albany and Syracuse could meet much of the demand of the inter-village travel not met by “the train” (New York Central passenger service) and the limited number of Autonomobiles that then existed.

    Each of S/PI’s 21st century Mobility and Access concepts is based on systems that have or now work in some First World nation-state.

    EMR

  20. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Thanks for the tolerance EMR.

    I admit.. my ignorance about the distinctions of the language and of settlement patterns is large.

    But .. my defense is this – I think I’m probably representative of many… and change – of the type that is advocated – must become part of the central dialogue before it can ever get to the next step – which would be constituency support for it.

    It has to get beyond the wonk stage and into the vernacular of citizens… who not only know the differences but advocate – as voters – for change.

    I give one simple example.

    In Stafford – there’s a debate over whether or not TND – traditional neighborhood development is a “good” thing or a “bad” thing… or the “right” thing or “wrong” thing…

    I’m willing to bet that the vast majority of those citizens who have an interest in TND in Stafford are as ignorant as I am about some of the distinctions alluded to.

    And yet.. there is going to be a debate and then a vote… and the outcome will be either to not allow them … or to allow them and either direction has long-term and profound implications for settlement patterns.. in that region.

    Somebody with credentials has to weigh in on the TND issue if for no other reason to help those who would support or oppose it – better understand their own opinions.

  21. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    You are right on all counts.

    PROPERTY DYNAMICS is the best strategy some of use could come up with to reach “real” citizens. We will get back to that once we wrap up TRILO-G.

    Sorry I forgot “traditional neighborhood developemt” That is a classic! Most that I have seen is “psudo traditional Cluster scale residential dwellings with an auto-related strip center hidden behind extra landscaping” If one is lucky there are some “live-work” dewllings back by the Big Box dumpsters.”

    You have pointed out that it is all a matter of location. Location, location, location plus scale and balance and words that have a common meaning.

    Just this AM I met with staff on the Glossary that I promised Jim ages ago.

    EMR

  22. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Great article, especially the following

    “The Los Angeles urbanized area (the U.S. Census Bureau’s functional definition of the city, which includes the city center and surrounding suburban areas) has become more than 25% denser over the last 50 years, making it the densest in the country.”

    Wow! A reporter writing about suburban sprawl who manages to use defined terms like “urbanized area” which has statistics kept by the Census Bureau.

    Facts. What a concept!

    And guess what? When you use facts instead of vague jibberish like clear edges and New Urban Areas you find that maybe sprawl isn’t as bad as the NIMBYs would like you to believe. Maybe the NIMBYs are just pursuing a self-centered philosophy of living a no growth lifestyle funded by money from the suburbs.

    Hmmmm…..

    Great article.

  23. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Groveton:

    “The Los Angeles urbanized area (the U.S. Census Bureau’s functional definition of the city, which includes the city center and surrounding suburban areas) has become more than 25% denser over the last 50 years, making it the densest in the country.”

    (If you bothered to read our work you would find we published this same data and observation years ago. We also used it to help articulate “New Urban Region” as an organic component of human settlement patterns. Further the edge of the Census Bureaus “urbanized area” is a good approximation of where the logical location of the Clear Edge was five to seven years ago.)

    “Wow! A reporter writing about suburban sprawl who manages to use defined terms like “urbanized area” which has statistics kept by the Census Bureau.”

    (You would also find that the definition of ‘urbanized area’ as suggested by the above is one of the more useful ones and one we use in the proof of the of the Five Natural Laws of Human Settlement Pattern.

    (“Urbanized Area, unfortunatly is roundly ignored by the Census Bureau in defining other componets of New Urban Regions.)

    “Facts. What a concept!”

    (We try to use them all the time.)

    “And guess what? When you use facts instead of vague jibberish like clear edges (it is “Clear Edge”) and New Urban Areas (in is New Urban Region) you find that maybe sprawl isn’t as bad as the NIMBYs would like you to believe.”

    (NIMBYs and municipal politicians who pander to them are the ones who played a key role in creating dysfunctional human settlement patterns. We never use the “S” word because there “S” is in the eyes of the beholder. The Census Bureau also does not include it in their formal vocabulary as far as I have seen.)

    “Maybe the NIMBYs are just pursuing a self-centered philosophy of living a no growth lifestyle funded by money from the suburbs.”

    (NIMBYs are just doing what they believe is in their best interest. They are wrong. However, those who make fun of attempts to create intelligent dialogue on the forces impacting human settlement pattern just give them cover to keep making decisions in the market and in the voting booth that are not in their own best interst.)

    (Nothing in your “comment” contradicts our position on Bruegmann’s fatal errors and misconceptions if that was your intent.)

    (Have a good weekend.)

    (EMR)

Leave a Reply

Read More