CNU20: New Urbanism's Young Adult Angst

New Urban townhomes, Six Corners, Chicago.jpg

Possibly the most earnest folks in the real estate development industry assembled for the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Congress of the New Urbanism in West Palm Beach, Florida this month. Among the excellent accomplishments of CNU20 attendees: a credible car/pedestrian strategy, some fine looking new communities, and perhaps best of all, a body of hard-won knowledge about town-making for citizen education.

Officially, CNU20 was optimistic and confident, but an undercurrent of negativism marred the event. More than one New Urbanist questioned the validity of what by now should have been a transformative movement. But the imposition of form-based codes and regulations on city growth has become a stress point in the movement's evolution.

Three hundred communities now boast New Urbanist town planning, over a dozen communities have adopted form-based zoning, and urban design schools are teaching the New Urban principles all over the country, facts triumphed during the opening plenary session. Form-based zoning uses a hierarchy of increasingly dense districts with defined boundaries, rather than land-use (or Euclidian) zoning to regulate growth. These principles are exquisitely defined in a model code nicknamed the Smart Code, which defines street width and sidewalk width, and provides fine-grained guidance on the form of a building on a given lot. Participants in early work sessions were taught how to work the code, and walked the hot, humid streets of West Palm Beach to interpret its many nuances and subtleties.

In 2003, Downtown West Palm Beach was redeveloped, and it should be a proud example of the earliest New Urban efforts. Instead, conference participants spoke of the result with open distaste. The main outdoor plaza features a noisy fountain, which a group of attorneys, architects, and land planners belittled as "a mini Bellagio”; a pale imitation of the huge Las Vegas hotel's water feature. Andrés Duany, one of the founders of the CNU, stated during the conference that “much of the architecture of the downtown zone was junk.” The movement’s most flamboyant spokesman, James Howard Kunstler, cited the "cartoonish, low quality finish of the buildings” as a failure. The distance New Urbanists have put between themselves and one of their finest achievements is dismaying.

When not complaining about West Palm Beach, many practitioners wandered the somewhat sparse exhibit hall of booths sponsored by municipalities, attorneys, and consultants. Conversations often hit notes of personal suffering. Few new communities of any scale are being funded, so just as the supply of highly trained New Urbanists has hit the market, demand has dwindled to a trickle of infill projects here and there. Morale at the ground level was quite low, given the effort New Urbanists have put forth.

Pedestrian-based urban form is a science that New Urbanists can offer to every community, and it has been a win for them where it has been implemented. Our monocultural vehicular transport model of car-dominated cities has made people work hard to carve out social space. The New Urbanist critique of the aesthetics of transportation is right on target. Armed with plenty of real data about how pedestrian environments work, New Urbanists have succeeded at softening the city and allowing pedestrians to compete.

New Urbanists can also point to successes in the real estate market. In one study session, three single-family residential New Urbanist communities were analyzed, and the developer’s financial models were revealed. Each of the three communities fared better than their competitive set through the 2008-2012 cycle, in terms of net present value, appraisals, and foreclosure rate. New Urbanists claimed credit for this, although the affluent demographics and in-town locations tilted the plate in their favor. Still, New Urbanists have created a strong model that works for a segment of the population.

Perhaps New Urbanism's most potent contributions are to the art and science of traditional town planning. A solid body of knowledge that is based upon beautiful real places— Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia, to name just two — now informs much of the theory behind place-making. We Americans are notably unsentimental about our cities, tearing down landmarks and whole districts in the quest for efficiency and betterment. New Urbanists have made it fashionable once again to care about history and good design, and our cities are the better for it.

The CNU’s 20th anniversary marks a curious point in the life of this laudable and lasting movement. Because there isn't any new development occurring, government effortshave turned towards adding form-based code overlays to existing cities. Already, Miami and Philadelphia have passed these codes to regulate growth. Many other cities like Orlando operate a standard zoning code by ordinance, while enforcing a form-based code as well. Property owners, developers, and design teams must now satisfy the intricacies of two local codes, rather than one, to get a building permit.

While de-regulation is a term on everyone’s lips, this quiet up-tick in regulation has occurred largely under the radar screen. Those pushing for form-based code are largely consultants, who argue that the code will make for a better city by protecting us from ourselves. Municipal officials are amenable to, it, too.Both groups see the job security it promises them. Developers see profit if their communities can boast adherence to a strict code that promises a better lifestyle.

Developers would normally scream loudly at any new regulation, no matter how trivial, but they are passively allowing form-based code because of the effect it can have on their bottom lines.
If these codes tend to increase cost, well, the financial investors don’t complain, because the more money that's borrowed to complete these structures, the more interest income they earn. So — form-based codes benefit all the interest groups that advocate their implementation.

At CNU20 we witnessed the coming of age of a new regulatory regime. Place-making, once an activity trusted to individual citizens, has become codified; a vision enforced by authorities and interpreted by high priests who have special training to understand how to make a proper city. Maybe we have so abused our power as individuals that we deserve to have this power taken away. Perhaps our city form is so ugly, and so dysfunctional, that we cannot rescue it without serious intervention.

Or, perhaps not. The American Dream is not about freedom from sprawl, as suggested in the movement’s seminal manifesto, “Suburban Nation”. Rather, it's about freedom to choose. New Urbanists might be able to provide this freedom within the confines of a new institution, the Smart Code, as long as the Smart Code produced good results. But if the critique at CNU20 of their own Downtown West Palm Beach is any indication, the Smart Code ain’t so smart after all.

American town planning needs less regulation, not more. Let’s use CNU’s body of knowledge to educate citizens and provide a path forward, not with the manacles of a new code, but with the freedom to create a new urban form that suits the lifestyles of the 21st century.

Flickr photo by Eric Alix Rogers, New Urban, in Six Corners, Chicago. New houses, all facing a common sidewalk, with garages on alleys behind. Off of Kilbourn, just south of Irving Park.

Richard Reep is an architect and artist who lives in Winter Park, Florida. His practice has centered around hospitality-driven mixed use, and he has contributed in various capacities to urban mixed-use projects, both nationally and internationally, for the last 25 years.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


That is not to say that many households aren't amendable to higher densities, minimal setbacks, and walkable environments. My personal and professional experience suggests, however, that those households attracted by such attributes seek authentic and organic environments. They want to live in the district that has existed since the 19th century that checks all of the "new urbanist" boxes, not one that was created last year to resemble such.

Game Mobile
Game teen teen
Game Vườn thượng uyển


Hello! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a team of volunteers and
starting a new initiative in a community in the same niche.
Your blog provided us valuable information to
work on. You have done a wonderful job!
Suc Khoe
Suc Khoe va doi song

Belgravia Villas will be

Belgravia Villas will be accessible via public transport along Ang Mo Kio Ave 5. Commuting to Toa Payoh and Paya Lebar area as well as the city area is therefore very convenient. It is also near to many eateries along the Upper Serangoon area as well as NEX shopping mall. belgravia villas

This article is my problem area and interested

I have read this article several times and enjoyed. Because it's what I want to know about real estate and planning for the future. The infrastructure is deployed to fit the current. Click here...
thuoc giam can and click here

Thank you for the detailed summary

Good day! I could have sworn I’ve visited this site before but after looking at many of the posts I realized it’s new to me. Anyways, I’m definitely delighted I discovered it and I’ll be bookmarking it and checking back often!
Magento extension
Magento affiliate extension
Magento menu extension
Magento SEO extension
Magento Auction extension
Magento ajax cart
magento one page checkout
Magento tutorials

hello!,I like your writing

hello!,I like your writing very much! percentage we keep up a correspondence extra approximately your post on AOL? I need an expert on this space to resolve my problem. Maybe that's you! Taking a look ahead to see you. click view more

Good Article...but

Richard, good article and I generally agree with you on the "less not more" regulation. However, I think you're missing the key explanation as to why new urbanist communities are not greater in number. And why some have not been perceived as more successful.

In my mind, it's got nothing to do with form-based codes, or the real estate economics of new urbanist development programs (which, obviously, are influenced by form-based codes). It relates to a visible reality: most U.S. households simply don't want to purchase or rent property in developments that fit the "new urbanist" bill. As you point out, they attract/appeal to only a (small) segment of the population.

That is not to say that many households aren't amendable to higher densities, minimal setbacks, and walkable environments. My personal and professional experience suggests, however, that those households attracted by such attributes seek authentic and organic environments. They want to live in the district that has existed since the 19th century that checks all of the "new urbanist" boxes, not one that was created last year to resemble such.

Although not directly relevant, I'm reminded of the housing-over-commercial example. By and large, the only households that are willing to live in dwelling units over commercial space are planners, architects, and artists (plus those with no other housing choice). New urbanist densities to a large degree, I suspect, yield a similar result. When investing hundreds of thousands of dollars in housing, most households simply feel like they should be "getting more" than 18' between themselves and their neighbor. And those that are Okay with that will invest that money in truly urban housing product that really offers organic (and not planned) walkability, among other things.

I personally don't think any sort of new urbanist movement will gain real traction in this country. But that doesn't mean land use patterns can't be more efficient. I just think it has to happen organically as young households make trade offs. I am all for influencing things such as default minimum single family densities, but in the end you can't really dictate lifestyle through planning. Planning needs to respond to preferences, not enforce them. In the end, developers, home builders, and equity investors will give the people what they want. After all..that IS how they make money.

Thank for your great

Thank for your great article.I love it.I will visit more often.
Game 24h
dang nhap dang ky
bac si
hai hoai linh
hai chien thang
vui game
choi game
tro choi vui

some markets

I am a real estate agent in Northwest Indiana outside Chicago. We have one of the better known (at least when it started development) New Urbanist "Towns". It has largely failed.

There are several reasons why it failed. 1.It's far too expensive for this market for what it is. 2. People move to my market to get away from an urban environment (get away from Chicago). 3. Inexperienced land development arm of the local electric utility (yeah, figure that one out). They also got taken advantage of by local crooked politicians and labor unions. They opened to development in 1997, and is still mostly unfinished to this day. Regular subdivisions started and completed all around this development in the same time.

Expensive Housing in my market is the following. 1. Estate type custom homes on large lots (sometime with horses) of several acres. 2.Country club type subdivisions. 3 Lakefront (Lake Michigan) houses. Not over-sized, overpriced houses on tiny little lots. If you like that you live in Chicago, not here. That's why it doesn't work in many places including Northwest Indiana. They are too expensive for the majority of the market (not just here), and the top of the market has plenty of choices. They don't chose density here. They need to try a lower price point, something that may not be possible.