In the late 1980s, a new approach to the creation and revitalization of communities began to emerge in North America. Based on the development patterns used prior to World War II, the New Urbanism seeks to reintegrate the components of modern life - housing, workplace, shopping and recreation - into compact, pedestrian - friendly, mixed-use neighborhoods linked by transit and set in a larger regional open space framework.

The New Urbanism is an alternative to suburban sprawl, a form of low-density development that consists of large, single-use "pods"-office parks,housing subdivisions, apartment complexes, shopping centers-all of which must be accessed by private automobile.

Initially dubbed "neo-traditional planning," the New Urbanism is best known for projects built in new growth areas such as Seaside (Walton County, Florida, 1981; Duany and Plater-Zyberk Town Planners), Kentlands (Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1988; Duany and Plater-Zyberk Town Planners) and Laguna West (Sacramento County, California, 1990; Calthorpe Associates).

The principles which define New Urbanism can also be applied successfully to infill and redevelopment sites within existing urbanized areas.

In fact, the leading proponents of New Urbanism believe that infill development should be given priority over new development in order to revitalize city centers and limit sprawl. An early manifesto by several leading New Urbanists states: "...we can, first, infill existing communities and, second, plan new communities that will more successfully serve the needs of those who live and work within them" (Ahwahnee Principles, 1991, Local Government Commission). Unfortunately, many of the current social, political and economic realities in the U.S. favor development at the metropolitan edge.

The major principles of New Urbanism are: All development should be in the form of compact, walkable neighborhoods and/or districts. Such places should have clearly defined centers and edges. The center should include a public space - such as a square, green or an important street intersection - and public buildings - such a library, church or community center, a transit stop and retail businesses. Neighborhoods and districts should be compact (typically no more than one quarter mile from center to edge) and detailed to encourage pedestrian activity without excluding automobiles altogether. Streets should be laid out as an interconnected network (usually in a grid or modified grid pattern), forming coherent blocks where building entrances front the street rather than parking lots. Public transit should connect neighborhoods to each other, and the surrounding region. A diverse mix of activities (residences, shops, schools, workplaces and parks, etc.) should occur in proximity. Also, a wide spectrum of housing options should enable people of a broad range of incomes, ages, and family types to live within a single neighborhood/district.

Large developments featuring a single use or serving a single market segment should be avoided. Civic buildings, such as government offices, churches and libraries, should be sited in prominent locations. Open spaces, such as parks, playgrounds, squares, and greenbelts should be provided in convenient locations throughout a neighborhood. Developers, planners, local government officials and citizens have all shown great interest in New Urbanist design approaches, particularly in regions that are experiencing conflicts related to growth.

Many see the New Urbanism as a win-win approach that enables a community's growth to be channeled into a physical form that is more compatible with the scale of existing neighborhoods, that discourages auto use, that is less costly to service and that is less consumptive of land and natural resources.

Despite such benefits, the New Urbanism has yet to be broadly embraced as a development model. One reason for this is that its physical design standards and implementation practices are not fully compatible with the regulatory framework in most regions of the U.S. and Canada. For example, many fire departments require streets that are wider than those proposed by New Urbanists. Zoning laws often discourage secondary living units within established residential areas or require large setbacks for homes and businesses.

Another reason for the slow adoption of New Urbanism is that the real estate industry is highly segmented by land use category (such as single-family housing, multi-family housing, retail, office and warehouse). Each category has its own practices, markets, trade associations, and financing sources. The highly integrated development strategy advocated by the New Urbanists requires a more holistic approach to community-building than the real-estate industry is currently structured to deliver. However, in the face of these challenges, New Urbanist communities are consistently achieving much higher prices than those in more conventional adjacent developments. Despite such barriers, public opposition to conventional suburban development is creating greater demand for alternative forms of growth, such as New Urbanism. To address this need, a coalition of architects, urban designers, developers, government officials and others formed the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) in 1993 to advance the principles of New Urbanism and promote their broad application. Since then the organization has hosted a series of annual meetings and drafted a Charter of the New Urbanism (ratified in May, 1996).

For additional information, contact CNU at: Congress for the New Urbanism The Hearst Building 5 Third Street, Suite 725 San Francisco, CA 94103 Phone: 415.495.2255 Fax: 415.495.1731 Email: cnuinfo@cnu.org

* Article courtesy of the Congress for New Urbanism