Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
New and Old Urbanism: Designing Communities for People and Nature
Christian Wagley
www.sustainabletownconcepts.com
Land development is occurring at a far
higher rate than population
growth, resulting in sprawl. In the nation’s
34 metropolitan areas with populations
greater than one million people, between
1950 and 1990 the population increased
92.4%, while the urbanized land area grew
by 245%, or 2.65 times the population
growth rate.
Source: Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions Between Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality, USEPA
From 1990 to 1996, Pensacola's urbanized land area
has exploded, growing from 174 square miles to
337 square miles, a nearly 95 percent increase. In
the same time period, the area's population only
increased from 270,000 to 280,000. Those 10,000
new citizens of the Pensacola metro region overlay
a land area increase of 163 square miles, which
translates into roughly 63 people per square mile.
Compared to Pensacola's 1990 population density
of 1,551 persons per square mile, this new growth
pattern epitomizes sprawl.
Source: 1998 Sierra Club Sprawl Report
We drive up and down the gruesome, tragic suburban boulevards of commerce, and we're overwhelmed at the fantastic, awesome, stupefying ugliness of absolutely everything in sight -- the fry pits, the big-box stores, the office units, the lube joints, the carpet warehouses, the parking lagoons, the jive plastic townhouse clusters, the uproar of signs, the highway itself clogged with cars -- as though the whole thing had been designed by some diabolical force bent on making human beings miserable. And naturally, this experience can make us feel glum about the nature and future of our civilization.
James Howard Kunstler, Home from Nowhere, 1996
air pollution
water pollution
global warming
habitat alteration
The Congress for the New Urbanism views disinvestment in central cities, the spread of placeless sprawl, increasing separation by race and income, environmental deterioration, loss of agricultural lands and wilderness, and the erosion of society's built heritage as one interrelated community-building challenge.
Charter of the New Urbanism
compact
mixed-use
walkable
Source: Environmental Building News, September 1, 2007
Comparing Transportation and Operating Energy Use for an Office Building
For an average new office building built
to code, transportation accounts for
more than twice as much energy use as
building operation.
human-
scale, people-
friendly
street grid
beauty
environmental benefits
“The results of this analysis
suggest that strong support for
infill development can be one
of the most effective
transportation and emission-
reduction investments a region
can pursue.”
“Many communities assume that low-density development automatically protects water resources. This study has shown that this assumption is flawed and that pursuit of low-density development can in fact be counterproductive, contributing to high rates of land conversion and stormwater runoff and missing opportunities to preserve valuable land within watersheds.”
“Curbing emissions from cars depends on a three-legged stool: improved vehicle efficiency, cleaner fuels, and a reduction in driving...The research shows that one of the best ways to reduce vehicle travel is to build places where people can accomplish more with less driving.”
Promoting higher-density infill development, statewide high-speed
rail, and local transit could accommodate population growth to 2060 in a
way that reduces land loss to development from 7 million acres to 1.6
million acres.
Florida 2060: A Population Distribution Scenario for the State of Florida
health obesity Blue Zones
Where is the new in new urbanism?
Why aren’t we building more sustainable communities in the form
of traditional neighborhoods? Communities that use less water
and energy, generate less stormwater runoff, reduce air and
water pollution, and preserve open space…
It’s illegal to build traditional neighborhoods in most communities in America
Form-based codes support these outcomes:
walkable and mixed-use
neighborhoods, transportation options, conservation
of open lands, local character, housing diversity, and
vibrant downtowns.
Form-based codes discourage these outcomes:
sprawl development, automobile dependency, loss
of open lands, monotonous subdivisions, deserted
downtowns, and unsafe streets and parks.
We cannot create truly green buildings, or a truly green community, until we change the rules of development .
Are you ready to change the rules of development and
create a healthy, vibrant, sustainable
community?
