|
New Urbanism
New urbanism is an urban design movement whose popularity increased
beginning in the 1980s and early 1990s.
The goal of new urbanists is to reform all aspects of real estate
development and urban planning. These include everything from urban
retrofits, to suburban infill.
There are some common elements of new urbanist design. New urbanist
neighborhoods are walkable, and are designed to contain a diverse
range of housing and jobs. New urbanists support regional planning
for open space, appropriate architecture and planning, and the balanced
development of jobs and housing. They believe these strategies are
the best way to reduce the time people spend in traffic, to increase
the supply of affordable housing, and to rein in urban sprawl. Many
other issues, such as historic preservation, safe streets, green
building, and the renovation of brownfield land are also covered
in the Charter of the New Urbanism, the movement's seminal document.
Because new urbanist designs include many of the features (like
mixed use and emphasis on walkability) which characterized urban
areas in the pre-automobile age, the movement is sometimes known
as Traditional neighborhood design.
About new urbanism
(Adapted from "The New Urbanism: An alternative to modern,
automobile-oriented planning and development" by Robert Steuteville,
editor and publisher, New Urban News, 2004.)
Background
Through the first quarter of the 20th century, the United States
was developed in the form of compact, mixed-use neighborhoods. The
pattern began to change with the emergence of modern architecture
and zoning and ascension of the automobile. After World War II,
a new system of development was implemented nationwide, replacing
neighborhoods with a rigorous separation of uses that has become
known as conventional suburban development, or sprawl. The majority
of US citizens now live in suburban communities built in the last
50 years.
Although conventional suburban development has been popular, it
carries a significant price. Lacking a town center or pedestrian
scale, conventional suburban development spreads out to consume
large areas of countryside even as population grows relatively slowly.
Automobile use per capita has soared, because a motor vehicle is
required for the great majority of household and commuter trips.
Those who cannot drive are significantly restricted in their mobility.
The working poor living in suburbia spend a large portion of their
incomes on cars. Meanwhile, the American landscape where most people
live and work is dominated by strip malls, auto-oriented civic and
commercial buildings, and subdivisions without much individuality
or character.
Trends
The new urbanism is a reaction to sprawl. A growing movement of
architects, planners, and developers, new urbanism is based on principles
of planning and architecture that work together to create human-scale,
walkable communities. New urbanists take a wide variety of approaches—some
work exclusively on infill projects, others focus on transit-oriented
development, still others are attempting to transform the suburbs,
and many are working in all of these categories. New urbanism includes
traditional architects and those with modernist sensibilities. All,
however, believe in the power and ability of traditional neighborhoods
to restore functional, sustainable communities. Early in the 1960s,
Jane Jacobs authored The Death and Life of Great American Cities,
which set the precendent for the new urbanist trend by condemning
the accepted planning theories of the time; calling for an increased
effort by planners to reconsider the failing single-use housing
projects, large car-dependent thoroughfares, and segregated commercial
centers that had become the "norm" of civic planning and
zoning thought. Another mid-twentieth century writer that inspired
the new urbanist movement was the social philosopher/historian Lewis
Mumford, who criticized the "anti-urban" development of
post-war America.
Today's popular trend of new urbanism had its roots in the work
of maverick architects, planners, and theorists, like Jacobs, who
believed that the conventional planning thought was gradually failing
in one way or another. In the 1970s and 1980s, these new ideas emerged,
and eventually coalesced into a unified group in the 1990s. From
modest beginnings, the trend is beginning to have a substantial
impact. More than 600 new towns, villages, and neighborhoods are
planned or under construction in the U.S., using principles of new
urbanism. Additionally, hundreds of small-scale new urban infill
projects are restoring the urban fabric of cities and towns by reestablishing
walkable streets and blocks.
On the regional scale, new urbanism is having a growing influence
on how and where metropolitan regions choose to grow. At least 14
large-scale planning initiatives are based on the principles of
linking transportation and land-use policies and using the neighborhood
as the fundamental building block of a region.
In Maryland and several other states, new urbanist principles are
an integral part of smart growth legislation.
Moreover, new urbanism is beginning to have widespread impact on
conventional development. Mainstream developers are adopting new
urban design elements such as garages in the rear of houses, neighborhood
greens and mixed-use town centers. Projects that adopt some principles
of new urbanism but remain largely conventional in design are known
as hybrids.
Old and new urbanism
The new urbanism trend goes by other names, including neotraditional
design, transit-oriented development, and traditional neighborhood
development. Borrowing from urban design concepts throughout history,
new urbanism does not, and cannot merely replicate old communities.
New houses within neighborhoods, for example, must provide modern
living spaces and amenities that consumers demand (and that competing
suburban tract homes offer). Stores and businesses must have sufficient
parking, modern floor plans, and connections to automobile and pedestrian
traffic, and/or transit systems.
With proper design, large office, light industrial, and even "big
box" retail buildings can be situated in a walkable new urbanist
neighborhood. Parking lots, the most prominent feature of conventional
commercial districts, are accommodated to the side, the rear or
basement of new urban businesses. The size of lots are reduced through
shared parking, on-street parking, and shifts to other modes of
transportation.
Another difference between old and new urbanism is the street grid.
Most historic cities and towns in the US employ a grid that is relentlessly
regular. New urbanists often use a "modified" grid, with
"T" intersections and street deflections to calm traffic
and increase visual interest.
That blending of old and new is the basis of the adjective neotraditional,
a term that carries a lot of baggage, especially with modernists,
who see it as an architectural "style." However, it is
more of an urban design approach that borrows from the past while
adapting to the present and future. The very fact that new urbanists
must meet the demands of the marketplace keeps them grounded in
reality. Successful new urbanism performs a difficult balancing
act by maintaining the integrity of a walkable, human-scale neighborhood
while offering modern residential and commercial "product"
to compete with conventional suburban development. New urbanists
who cannot compete with conventional development or find a niche
that is poorly served by the real estate industry are doomed to
failure.
The difficulty of that balancing act is one reason why many developers
choose to build hybrids, instead of adopting all of the principles
of new urbanism. Some new urbanists think that hybrids pose a serious
threat to the movement, because they usually borrow the label and
language of the new urbanism. Other new urbanists believe that hybrids
represent a positive step forward from conventional suburban development.
Defining elements
The heart of new urbanism is in the design of neighborhoods, which
can be defined by 13 elements, according to town planners Andrés
Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, two of the founders of the Congress
for the New Urbanism. An authentic neighborhood contains most of
these elements:
1. The neighborhood has a discernible center. This is often a square
or a green and sometimes a busy or memorable street corner. A transit
stop would be located at this center. 2. Most of the dwellings are
within a five-minute walk of the center, an average of roughly 2,000
feet. 3. There are a variety of dwelling types—usually houses, rowhouses
and apartments—so that younger and older people, singles and families,
the poor and the wealthy may find places to live. 4. At the edge
of the neighborhood, there are shops and offices of sufficiently
varied types to supply the weekly needs of a household. 5. A small
ancillary building or garage apartment is permitted within the backyard
of each house. It may be used as a rental unit or place to work
(for example, office or craft workshop). 6. An elementary school
is close enough so that most children can walk from their home.
7. There are small playgrounds accessible to every dwelling—not
more than a tenth of a mile away. 8. Streets within the neighborhood
form a connected network, which disperses traffic by providing a
variety of pedestrian and vehicular routes to any destination. 9.
The streets are relatively narrow and shaded by rows of trees. This
slows traffic, creating an environment suitable for pedestrians
and bicycles. 10. Buildings in the neighborhood center are placed
close to the street, creating a well-defined outdoor room. 11. Parking
lots and garage doors rarely front the street. Parking is relegated
to the rear of buildings, usually accessed by alleys. 12. Certain
prominent sites at the termination of street vistas or in the neighborhood
center are reserved for civic buildings. These provide sites for
community meetings, education, and religious or cultural activities.
13. The neighborhood is organized to be self-governing. A formal
association debates and decides matters of maintenance, security,
and physical change. Taxation is the responsibility of the larger
community.
Examples
Seaside, Florida, the first new urbanist town, began development
in 1981 on 80 acres (324,000 m²) of Florida Panhandle coastline.
Seaside appeared on the cover of the Atlantic Monthly in 1988 when
only a few streets were completed, and it since became internationally
famous for its architecture and the quality of its streets and public
spaces. Seaside proved that developments that function like traditional
resort towns could be built in the postmodern era. Lots began selling
for $15,000 in the early 1980s and, slightly over a decade later,
lots prices had escalated to about $200,000. Today, most lots sell
for more than a million dollars, and houses sometimes top $5 million.
The town is now a tourist mecca.
Seaside’s influence has less to do with its economic success than
the attractiveness and dynamism related to its physical form. Many
developers have visited Seaside and gone away determined to build
something similar.
Since Seaside gained recognition, other new urban towns and neighborhoods
have been designed and are substantially built—including Legacy
Town Center in Plano, Texas; Haile Village Center in Gainesville,
Florida; Harbor Town in Memphis, Tennessee; Kentlands in Gaithersburg,
Maryland; King Farm in Rockville, Maryland; Addison Circle in Addison,
Texas; Orenco Station in Hillsboro, Oregon; Mashpee Commons in Mashpee,
Massachusetts; The Cotton District in Starkville, Mississippi; Celebration
and Avalon Park in Orlando, Florida; Cherry Hill Village in Canton,
Michigan, Baxter Village (www.villageofbaxter.com) in Fort Mill,
SC, and the redevelopment of Stapleton International Airport in
Denver, Colorado.
Designers are also using the principles of new urbanism to build
major new projects in cities and towns. In the mid-1990s, the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) adopted the principles
of the new urbanism in its multibillion dollar program to rebuild
public housing projects nationwide. New urbanists have planned and
developed hundreds of projects in infill locations. Most were driven
by the private sector, but many, including HUD projects, used public
money. New urbanist projects built in historic cities and towns
includes Crawford Square in Pittsburgh, City Place in West Palm
Beach, Highlands Garden Village in Denver, Park DuValle in Louisville,
and Beerline B in Milwaukee.
The United States is by no means alone in the "new urbanism"
shift, (though it is important to note most of the fundamental ideas
stem from European urban design), the river city of Brisbane, Queensland,
Australia is also experimenting with small more commercialised developments
such as Emporium, (a living, shopping, dining mecca). As well as
large scale initiatives such as Kelvin Grove Urban Village, [1],
a University/College, medium and high resedential living with retail
suiting all age groups and budgets.
Congress for New Urbanism
Meanwhile, leaders in this design trend came together in 1993 to
form the Congress for the New Urbanism, based in Chicago. The founders
are Andrés Duany, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Peter Calthorpe, Daniel
Solomon, Stefanos Polyzoides, and Elizabeth Moule, all practicing
architects and town planners. The Congress for the New Urbanism
has since grown to more than 2,000 members and is now the leading
international organization promoting new urbanist design principles.
Disney builds a town
In June of 1996, Disney unveiled its 5,000 acre (20 km²) town of
Celebration, near Orlando, Florida, and it has since eclipsed Seaside
as the best-known new urbanist community. In some respects, the
new urbanism and Disney have been uncomfortable bedfellows. While
using designers and principles closely associated with the new urbanism,
Disney has shunned the label, preferring to call Celebration simply
a "town." Meanwhile, the movement may have benefited from
all of Celebration’s publicity—but not without a price. Disney has
come under attack for what some perceive as heavy-handed rules and
management. For those who would attack new urbanism as insipid nostalgia,
Disney is a fat target. The fact remains that Celebration’s urban
design is generally of high quality and by most accounts serves
residents very well.
In the 1991 book Edge City, author Joel Garreau wrote that Americans
have not built "a single old-style downtown from raw dirt in
75 years." Celebration was one of the first real estate projects
to break that trend, opening its downtown in October, 1996; Seaside's
downtown was still mostly unbuilt at the time. (It could be argued
that Reston Town Center, opened in 1990 near Garreau's home in Washington,
D.C., could qualify.) Since then, scores of new urban projects have
followed suit with their own downtowns and mixed-use districts.
Criticisms
New urbanism is in part a reform movement and, as such, has drawn
criticism from all quarters of the political spectrum. Some members
of right wing view new urbanism as a collectivist plot designed
to rob Americans of their civil freedoms, property rights and free-flowing
traffic. Some members of the left wing view new urbanism as an example
of capitalistic excess, aligned with forces of greed that would
purge the underclass from urban areas for the benefit of the gentrifying
elite. Some environmentalists decry new urbanism as nothing more
than conventional sprawl dressed up with superficial stylistic cues,
while NIMBY activists routinely argue against new urbanism as being
too dense, with too much mixed use and around-the-clock activity.
Critics of new urbanism often accuse it of
elevating aesthetics over practicality, subordinating good city
planning principles to urban design dogma. Another charge is that
the movement is grounded in nostalgia for a period in American history
that may never have existed. A related charge is that the movement
represents nothing truly new, as towns and neighborhoods were built
on similar principles in the U.S. until the 1920s. However, perhaps
the most frequent criticism of the movement is that some of the
highest-profile projects—such as Celebration, Seaside, and The Glen
in Glenview, Illinois—represent a form of sprawl themselves, in
that they are built on what was previously open space. According
to New Urban News, new urbanist developments as a group are approximately
one-half infill and one-half greenfield land.
A stream of thought in sustainable development maintains that sustainabilty
is primarily based on the combination of high density and transit
service. To the extent that many new urbanist developments rely
on automobile transport and serve the detached single family housing
market, critics claim they fall short of being truly sustainable.
However, a forthcoming rating and certification scheme for neighborhood
environmental design, LEED-ND, should help to quantify the sustainability
of New Urbanist neighborhood design; it is being developed by a
partnership between the US Green Building Council, Natural Resources
Defense Council, and the Congress for the New Urbanism.
Beyond cursory levels, say critics, the provision for cultural and
social interchange in new urbanist towns is limited, and the permanent
residential populations of new urbanist resort communities are comparatively
small and culturally homogeneous. Critics claim that new urbanism
is somewhat incomplete: while providing a basic framework for the
improvement of the civic landscape, it does not entirely provide
for the diversity necessary for city success. Critics call into
question whether or not towns and cities are objects that can be
"created," or whether they are, in fact, the results of
a process of cultural, social, political and religious interaction
that the new urbanists seek to accelerate and simulate, in order
to make their towns more palatable to their predominantly affluent
(and, some argue, nostalgic) clientele.
To date, new urbanists have captured only a few percent of the residential
market. The conventional suburban development retail model, particularly
the strip mall format, presents a formidable challenge to the new
urbanist ideal of walkable town centers. Critics charge that new
urbanist developers must get better at making their neighborhoods
affordable, and prove that their ideas are superior for both revitalizing
and recovering old cities, towns and building new communities.
|
