#NEW URBANISM PROFESSIONAL#

Lastly, and this isn't really a criticism of NU itself, but many developers have begun to incorporate NU elements into their subdivisions without much regard for the substantive aims of the movement. Some of that can be attributed to the fact that most NU developments are quite new so they have a bit of a sterile look without the natural wear and tear of older urban neighbourhoods. Some of these places do admittedly have a bit of a Disneyland feel that's a little off-putting. Some also tend to criticise New Urbanism as being 'artificial' or 'creepy'. This may just be an issue of local regulations not allowing the construction of NU developments (or developers being unwilling to build them) thus artificially restricting the supply of NU neighbourhoods. Many NU developments are essentially 'designer suburbs' and houses tend to command a premium. Some planners argue that NU is just putting lipstick on a pig and there should be more focus on things like transit oriented developments and urban infill.ДЄnother criticism centres around affordability. Kentlands, Seaside etc.) NU developments on the suburban fringe also do nothing to reduce car ownership (though people in NU suburbs do likely make fewer car trips per day on average). Many early NU developments in the US, for instance, are criticised for not introducing higher densities than traditional suburbia (see, e.g. The criticism is that it legitimises suburban sprawl by essentially giving it an aesthetic makeover without addressing some core issues of suburbia. I've heard it derisively referred to as 'sprawl with porches'. Of course, you still see a lot of low-density, auto oriented sprawl in the US, but that's not what new planners are advocating for-that stuff usually gets built due to the influence of city councils, private developers, businesses, civil engineering departments, and older planners who like the easy routine of rubber-stamping every Walmart and Olive Garden. There's just not much need to latch onto it as a movement, since, I mentioned before, most of its principles have been incorporated into modern planning already. But the NU developments might not mesh with the surrounding areas, which might be elevated highways, auto-oriented suburbs, or even rural areas. The result is that a lot of developments are built under the label of NU that are in and of themselves dense, multistory, mixed use, and walkable. Instead, though, most authorities only allow a few isolated NU-style developments. The original idea was that the NU principals would replace or be incorporated into existing city codes, creating gradual transitions from dense urbanized areas to rural ones. Many people find this stifling, or don't see the value of it, so it can be controversial. NU usually advocates architectural control, ie, creating requirements for new developments to have a uniform look, often inspired by classic pre-1939 design. There are just a few issues I can think of off the top of my head. It is one of only a few organizations addressing the confluence of community, economics, environment, and design in our cities, and the only one asserting that these issues must be addressed simultaneously through urban design and planning.The general principals are sound, and over the last 30 years, have become incorporated into modern planning practices. Their practices can then be harnessed to realize the goals and purposes of the CNU.Д¬NU takes its name from the Congresses it sponsors, annual gatherings which provide professionals, developers, elected officials, and community representatives the opportunity to discuss issues related to the health and vitality of cities.

#NEW URBANISM PROFESSIONAL#

The new urbanism is a movement, because it aims through professional practice and free association to educate those with a role in the design of the physical world. We aim to reverse the process of urban sprawl and to apply public policy and private development to the task of building towns, cities and regions based on the design of traditional neighborhoods. It is a discipline because its practice is based on a qualified set of principles that are directed to a particular goal: American families should have better lives than they have now, in places hospitable and beautiful that support their values and their needs. The new urbanism is both a professional discipline and a movement. We believe that the task of rebuilding neighborhoods, cities, and regions is profoundly interdisciplinary. We stand for the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of national environments, and the preservation of our built legacy. Since 1993 the Congress for the New Urbanism has advocated for the restructuring of public policy and development practices to support the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions.

New urbanism