Posted on 06/03/2006 12:48:28 PM PDT by Lorianne
PROVIDENCE -- New Urbanism isn't for everyone.
Andres Duany, one of the founders of the movement, admitted that the Congress of New Urbanism attracts about 1,150 new members each year and loses about 1,000.
"Are we worried?" Duany asked.
No.
New Urbanism is celebrating one of its most successful years. New Urbanists were called on to help rebuild the communities in Mississippi and Louisiana that were devastated by last season's hurricanes, and the movement emerged from the outskirts of architecture and urban planning into the mainstream.
New Urbanism is an anti-sprawl, pro-city way of thinking about real-estate development. Its members include architects, planners, developers, politicians, transit professionals and educators. The primary goal of New Urbanism is to build densely populated, walkable neighborhoods that blend all types of uses from residential and office space to retail stores, schools and public transportation.
Critics of the movement say it promotes Disney-style neighborhoods that cater to the middle class.
Duany spoke to several hundred conference attendees (the group has 3,000 members) yesterday evening at the Rhode Island Convention Center. He warned the audience that New Urbanism requires high-level thinking.
"There's a tendency in American public discourse to oversimplify, to dumb it down," he said.
He pointed to the national problem of obesity. The popular line of thinking blames obesity on junk food, and the solution put forth, Duany said, is bigger nutrition labels on food packages.
New Urbanism thinks bigger. Its principles attempt to reduce the nation's reliance on automobiles, to create friendlier neighborhoods, preserve open space and build successful transit systems.
"The discourse is so intelligent in this congress," Duany said. "We don't oversimplify the issues."
Apparently, some people can't quite keep up.
"I say fine, you need to join another organization like Rails to Trials that does one thing," Duany said.
New Urbanists ability to "sustain complexity" and debate the issues makes the organization strong.
"We will be healthy so long as those who leave [the congress] are the ones we would prefer left," he said. "We will begin to die when those who leave are the best, the most intelligent and energetic among us."
Duany and his concepts have been embraced by Providence. Duany has led several neighborhood planning sessions, called charrettes, in the city. New Urbanism has driven much of Arnold "Buff" Chace's development in downtown Providence, and Mayor David N. Cicilline proposed redevelopment of LaSalle Square and the bridges over Route 95 was largely based on Duany's ideas.
Duany attributed New Urbanisms success to the failure of the suburbs and the attractiveness of the urban life.
Suburbs promised a back-to-nature lifestyle and mobility. Instead, suburbanites have a plat with a patch of grass and gridlock.
City neighborhoods, as envisioned by New Urbanists, offer everything you need in walking distance, a chance to meet your neighbors and a sense of place.
"New Urbanism," Duany said, "is marketable."
Ah, so it smells like New Jersey...
We all moved to the cities for the Sushi...
hmmm, what is new about it, NY has had that for decades.
Here in this city the home owner really has to jump through hoops.
The following is how to get people back into city living:
1) Tax credits and vouchers for K-12 schooling. Crappy and dangerous government schools, as well as busing, contributed to driving the middle classes out of the cities.
End the practice of automatically building a government school just because a new housing development is built. When my husband and I take our yearly skiing trip to Alta, Utah, I can't help wondering if there would be fewer multi-million homes on those fragile alpine slopes if there were no door to door school bus service and government school service to that area.
2) Reduce city business and personal taxes. My childhood city of Philadelphia has a personal income tax of more than 6%! Who in their right mind would choose to work and live there?
2) End the drug war. Legalize all drugs except antibiotics. The prohibition on drugs is driving up crime.
3) Honest elections. Put those who would corrupt our elections in prison for a LONG time. A vote cast fraudulently means that another honest citizen is disenfranchised. Philadelphia's disgustingly corrupt elections should be cleaned up immediately!
4) Honest and fair police and judges.
5) Profound respect for private property. This means rational zoning and building regulations and the end to eminent domain seizures. Do the above and people will return to the cities.
That just means that people who don't want to live in the New Urbanist zones can build houses in the County. Isn't that what folks who want new homes on large lots are doing already?
No it doesn't. It applies to the city too. Nothing to stop the city from taking property for NU use.
Voter reaction. Kelo hasn't exactly been a popular decision.
Good article. Thanks for the link.
The above always slays me! The "Urbanites" really do not remember what city life was like way back when. And yet, their goal seems to be to get everyone OUT of the country and the 'burbs and force 'em back into the city.
And then they'll whine and cry that all those people moving back into the city ruined "The Urban Experience" for them, LOL!
We should package it and sell it to the DOD.
Bwahaha... It takes me 45 minutes to get to work on a good commute. Uphill, to and from. If I even try to walk around my neighborhood, I get hit up by stray dogs and local delinquents for everything from smokes to cash. Sure could do with a thinner population, myself.
This "New Urbanism" won't work without heavy spending in law enforcement.
True. But mandating zero lot lines, small setbacks, no front garages or driveways over a large region is just insane. Especially when no mass transit exists or could ever be self-supporting. Gee, why not just mandate cookie cutter highrises if all you want is a high population density?
No. Not when a regional "Metro" controls the countryside zoning too. See Portland.
I really don't think the goal is to force everyone to live in one way.
If that were true, then you could say the current zoning codes are trying to get everyone to live in cul-de-sac surburbs. That may have been the effect due to lack of choice, but it was not the intent.
The point is that there are choices and options. Then everyone can live at the density and the style of land develpment they want.
The people who wanted to live in a new house in a traditionally laid out neighborhood, until recently, were not allowed to do because such neighborhoods were ILLEGAL to build.
I agree if ALL developments are mandated the same ... the way that they have been for the past 40 years or so ... spaghetti street cul-de-sac neighborhoods were FORCED on everyone who wanted a suburban home. There was no choice for anything else!
To that extent, I agree that there should not be a one-size-fits-all approach to land planning and development. We've already had that for 40+ years!
My comments were directed at the link metesky posted, not the article you posted. Sorry if my comments confused you! :)
Gulfport MS is NOT Portland OR, thank heavens!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.