New Urbanism
Clustered, Mixed-Use, Multi-Modal Neighborhood Design
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TDM
Encyclopedia
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated
August 27, 2007
This chapter describes ways to design and build more attractive, accessible, walkable, multi-modal, and livable neighborhoods. People who live and work in such areas tend to drive less and rely more on alternative modes than in more automobile-dependent locations.
New Urbanism (also called Smart Growth, New Community Design, Neotraditional Design, Traditional Neighborhood Development, Location Efficient Development and Transit Oriented Development) is a set of development practices to create more attractive, efficient and livable communities. These can significantly improve Accessibility and reduce per-capita automobile travel. Specific design features are listed below. Of course, not all of these features are included in all New Urban developments.
New Urbanism Neighborhood Design Features (Peter Swift)
1. The community has a
discernible Activity Center. This is often a plaza,
square or green, and sometimes a busy or memorable intersection. A transit stop
should be located at this center.
2. Special attention is paid to
protecting the public realm and creating quality public spaces, including
sidewalks and paths, parks, Streetscapes and public
buildings. This helps create more community identity and cohesion, leading to
stronger and healthier communities.
3. Buildings at the center are
placed close to the sidewalk and to each other, creating an urban sense of
spatial definition. Buildings towards the edges are placed further away and
further apart from each other, creating a more rural environment.
4. Most dwellings are within a
five-minute walk (a quarter mile) from the center. Streets are designed for
walking and cycling, with sidewalks on both sides, bike lanes where needed,
good crossings, traffic calming features used to control motor vehicle traffic
speeds, and other features to encourage non-motorized travel.
5. There are a variety of
dwelling types. These take the form of houses, row houses, and apartments, such
that younger and older, singles and families, the poorer and the wealthier can
find places to live. Density averages 6-7 units per acre or greater (Campoli
and MacLean, 2002).
6. There are places to work
within and adjacent to the neighborhood, including shops, office buildings, and
live-work units.
7. There are shops sufficiently
varied to meet common household needs, such as convenience stores, a post office,
a bank machine, and a gym.
8. A small ancillary building
should be permitted within the backyard of houses. It may be used as a rental
apartment, or as a place to work.
9. There should be an
elementary school close enough so that most children can walk from their
dwelling. This distance should not be more than one mile.
10. There are parks, trails and
playgrounds near every dwelling. This distance should not be more than
one-eighth of a mile.
11. Networks of highly connected
roads and paths provide multiple routes between destinations, increasing
accessibility and reducing problems if one route is closed. Access points into
neighborhoods may be highlighted with a gateway or signs.
12. Thoroughfares are relatively
narrow and shaded by rows of trees that slow traffic and create an appropriate
environment for pedestrian and bicyclist.
13. Parking lots and garage
doors rarely end of front the thoroughfares. Parking is relegated to the rear
of the buildings and usually accessed by alleys or lanes.
14. Certain prominent sites are reserved for public buildings. A building must be provided at the center for neighborhood meetings.
15. The neighborhood should be
self governing, deciding on matters of maintenance, security, and physical
evolution.
The land use reforms can be implemented at various geographic scales. New Urbanism and Transit Oriented Development reflect neighborhood and local level planning, while Access Management, Location-Efficient Development and Clustering reflect similar principles at the site and block level, and Smart Growth reflects these principles at the regional level. New Urbanism has gained increasing attention among development professionals and the general public, particularly in regions experiencing growth-related conflicts. Many see the New Urbanism as a way to accommodate growth while enhancing community and environmental objectives.
New Urbanism does not usually exclude automobile travel, but
it increases Transportation Options, and sometimes
gives Priority to walking, cycling and transit (Gehl
and Gemzoe, 2003; Nozzi, 2003). New Urbanism supports development of a more Connected street network, often using a modified grid
pattern. This provides multiple routes and more direct travel between
destinations compared with a disconnected street network with many dead-end
roads that result in more circuitous routes, and funnel traffic onto a few
roadways. Increased street connectivity has been showed to reduce per capita
vehicle travel, and reduce traffic volumes on major roads (Handy,
Some New Urbanist designers suggest that Streetscapes provide a sense of enclosure (Duany, Plater-Zyberk and Speck, 2000). As a general rule they recommend that urban street be no more than six times as wide across as the height of the buildings that line it, from the building front or row of trees on one side of the street to those on the other. Urban buildings should be designed with details and amenities that are oriented to pedestrians, not just motorists.
How much difference do these factors make? If you live in a highly Automobile Dependent neighborhood, virtually every trip you make requires driving. If you live in a New Urban neighborhood you can conveniently go shopping and perform other personal by walking or cycling, and your children can walk to school and parks. Common destinations such as stores, schools, recreation centers and Commercial Center are closer together, so your car trips are shorter. The result is an increase in Transportation Options, and a reduction in total mileage and vehicle costs.
New Urbanism can give people better options for where they live and work. For example, many people want to “age in place,” that is, they want to continuing living in their community as they become older, rather than moving to a specialized retirement community. For this to be possible their community must have Accessible land use patterns, with shops and other public services nearby, and diverse transportation services for people with various needs and abilities, including good Walking facilities that accommodate mobility aids and wheelchairs, and various types of Transit services.
New Urbanist features tend to increase the value and marketability of buildings. National market surveys indicate that about a third of home buyers would prefer to live in New Urbanist community if available (Hirschhorn and Souza, 2001; Bohl, 2003). A study by Eppli and Tu (2000) found that homes in New Urbanist communities sold for an average of $20,189 more than otherwise comparable homes in more conventional communities, an 11% increase in value. Song and Knaap (2003) also found that New Urban features increase property values. Studies summarized by Smith and Gihring (2003) indicate that proximity to public transit services can significantly increase property values.
Although many well-known New Urbanist projects are “master planned communities,” meaning large urban-fringe developments design as a unit, these concepts can also be incorporated into existing urban communities (Otak, 1999), and even in communities that have highways with heavy traffic through their Commercial Center (DEA, 1999). Existing residential and commercial areas are incorporating New Urbanist design features as part of redevelopment efforts. For example, older neighborhoods can implement Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Improvements, Reallocate Road Space, use Parking Management, encourage Location Efficient Development, and work to create a design identity.
New Urbanist development may face various barriers. Many
current planning regulations and development practices in
Another barrier to 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. New Urbanists requires a more integrated approach to development that requires changing these practices and coordinating stakeholders (Leinberger, 2001).
|
Livable
Neighborhoods (ERM Mitchell McCotter Pty, 2002) Livable Neighborhoods are compact, well-designed,
sustainable communities designed to enhance local identity, provide diverse
housing options, increase land use efficiency, increase local employment and
support alternative travel modes. Livable
Neighborhoods are defined by a convenient 5-minute (400 meter) walking area, totalling
about 50 hectares, with a highly interconnected network of streets and
compatible land use mix (such as shops within neighborhoods). Cul-de-sacs are
less frequent, with paths that provide connections for walking and cycling.
Where a site is of sufficient size, neighborhoods are clustered together
around a town center. Major roads, called neighborhood connectors form the spine of the
neighborhoods and towns, rather than the edges. Neighborhood and town centers
are located at the junctions of these streets. All streets, including
arterials and neighborhood connectors, have an important role in the urban
structure by accommodating all modes of travel, including walking, cycling,
public transit and driving, and by supporting active land uses. The emphasis
is on connectivity, amenity and integration to achieve a safe, efficient and
attractive road network. Streets
are designed to comfortably accommodate non-vehicular users and support
adjacent land uses, with generous footpaths and street trees. Buildings are
located directly onto street fronts (rather than set back, behind parking. On
busier streets, service roads and lanes are used to enable development to
front onto arterials. This provides passive surveillance of public spaces
that increases personal safety. Streets are provided with on-street parking
to increase the amount of shared parking. |
New Urbanist features can be designed into new development or implemented incrementally in existing neighborhoods. It usually requires changes to street design standards, and to zoning laws to allow higher densities and mixed land use. Urban renovation projects can incorporate New Urbanism features, including commercial infill and pedestrianization.
A new approach to building codes, called “form-based codes” is an important tool for implementing New Urbanist development. Form-based codes provide guidelines and building requirements that define a particular type of development desired in a particular area, such as low- or medium-density residential, or mixed-use urban village. It provides greater design flexibility and coordination than conventional, land use based codes.
|
Applying
New Urbanism To Large Retail (Beaumont and Tucker, 2002) Conflicts often develop over development of “big box,” franchise, and other large-scale retailers, because they tend to be automobile-oriented, have large parking lots, locate on arterial strips at the urban fringe, use generic building designs, and reduce economic activity from traditional Commercial Center. Some communities choose to prohibit or discourage such retailers altogether. Others work to apply New Urbanist design principles to make them more acceptable. These include: · Location. Locate large volume
retailers within existing urban areas, preferably within or close to existing
commercial areas, or in industrial areas, often as brownfield redevelopment
projects. ·
Size. Downsize such retailers so they fit better into urban areas. · Design. Require retailers to use
more Context Sensitive Design, including building
styles that reflect local traditions, and appropriate landscaping. · Transport and Parking
Management.
Encourage or require such retailers to implement Commute
Trip Reduction programs, Parking Management, and
other appropriate TDM strategies. · Impact Fees. Charge developers for
costs they impose on communities, including stormwater management and
increased vehicle traffic. Use variable fees that reward developers for
reducing these costs (Smart Growth Reforms). |
New Urbanism improves Accessibility, improves Transportation Choice, and reduces traffic speeds, which tend to reduce per capita automobile ownership and use, as discussed in the Land Use Impacts chapter. Although most individual design features have modest impacts on total travel, their effects are cumulative and synergistic, resulting in significant total reductions in vehicle use (NEW, 2001). Residents in well-designed New Urbanist neighborhoods with good walkability, mixed land use, Connected streets, and local services tend to drive 20-35% less than residents in automobile dependent areas, and even greater vehicle travel reductions may be possible if New Urbanism is coordinated with other TDM strategies, such as Transit Improvements, Carsharing, Road Pricing, Parking Management and Commute Trip Reduction programs.
Khattak
and Rodriguez (2005) found that, controlling for demographic factors, residents
of a neo-traditional community (Southern Village in Chapel Hill, NC) generate
22.1% fewer automobile trips and take 305.5% more walking trips than residents
of conventional design communities. These include reductions in both commute
and non-commute automobile travel. In the neo-traditional community, 17.2% of
trips are by walking compared with 7.3% in the conventional community. Average
per capita time spent in travel is similar between the two groups.
See Evaluating Nonmotorized Transport and PBQD (2000) for information on modeling travel impacts of New Urban design features.
Table 1 Travel Impact Summary
|
Objectives |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
3 |
Reduces per capita vehicle
travel. |
|
Reduces peak period
traffic. |
2 |
" |
|
Shifts peak to off-peak
periods. |
0 |
|
|
Shifts automobile travel to
alternative modes. |
3 |
Improves travel
alternatives. |
|
Improves access, reduces
the need for travel. |
3 |
Increases land use access. |
|
Increased ridesharing. |
1 |
Can increase ridesharing to
worksites. |
|
Increased public transit. |
3 |
Accommodates public
transit. |
|
Increased cycling. |
3 |
Improves cycling conditions
and access. |
|
Increased walking. |
3 |
Improves pedestrian conditions
and access. |
|
Increased Telework. |
0 |
|
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
0 |
Mixed impacts. |
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
New Urbanism can provide a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits.
· More housing and commercial options for consumers.
· Increased property values.
· Improved transport and
access for non-drivers, and support Universal Design.
· More affordable housing (Location Efficient Development).
· It can reduce automobile
dependency and use, providing consumer cost savings and reductions in
automobile travel that provide social benefits (such as reduced traffic
congestion, parking costs, accident risk, pollution and urban sprawl).
· It can significantly improve
Community Livability, interaction and cohesion.
· Increased traffic safety due
to narrower streets and slower traffic (Traffic Calming).
· Improved public Health due to increased walking and cycling.
Table 2 summarizes these impacts as identified in one major study. The actual benefits depend on conditions and design factors. Direct consumer benefits can be significant. McCann (2000) found that households living in communities with more diverse transportation systems save hundreds or thousands of dollars annually on transportation costs.
Table 2 Potential
Smart Growth Benefits (Burchell, et al, 1998;
PFBE, 2007)
|
Economic |
Social |
Environmental |
|
Consumer transportation cost savings. Economies of agglomeration (density). More efficient transportation. Traffic safety. Increased property values. |
More attractive communities. Improved transportation choice, particularly for nondrivers. Improved housing choices. Community cohesion and interaction. |
Greenspace and wildlife habitat preservation. Reduced air pollution. Reduce resource consumption. Reduced water pollution. Reduced “heat island” effect. |
Costs include the additional expenses associated with more detailed planning, design and amenities (sidewalks, transit, public spaces), and extra development costs associated with construction within existing urban areas. Some critics argue that New Urbanism and Smart Growth reduce housing affordability, but while some features do increase housing costs (such as urban growth boundaries), others reduce these costs (such as reduced parking and setback requirements, and secondary suites), allowing housing to be more affordable overall (Litman, 2000; Arigoni, 2001).
Higher-density, infill development may increase local traffic congestion and exposure to noise and air pollution, although regional traffic and pollution tends to decline if residents drive less (see discussion in Land Use Impacts chapter, and in Litman, 2000). Increased density often reduces the amount of greenspace within an urbanized area, although it can increase total regional greenspace by reducing per capita area of land development.
Table 3 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
2 |
Fewer trips per capita and
better access, offset at the local level by increased population density. |
|
Road & Parking Savings |
1 |
Reduces road and parking
capacity requirements, but may increase costs for traffic calming, cycling
and pedestrian facilities. |
|
Consumer Savings |
2 |
Can reduce vehicle and
development costs, although housing costs may increase. |
|
Transport Choice |
3 |
Increases travel choices
and access. |
|
Road Safety |
2 |
Reduces vehicle traffic
volumes and speeds. |
|
Environmental Protection |
3 |
Reduces vehicle use and
pavement. |
|
Efficient Land Use |
3 |
Encourages higher-density,
infill development. |
|
Community Livability |
3 |
Reduces vehicle traffic
volumes and speeds. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
New Urbanism design features have a variety of equity impacts. Some impacts may affect certain groups more than others, such as the effects of infill on existing neighborhoods. It can reduce subsidies associated with lower-density, sprawl development and automobile dependency. It can increase consumer housing and transportation choices, providing benefits to lower-income households and non-drivers. As described above, some New Urban developments are relatively expensive, but many New Urban design features (such as small lots, clustered development, and reduced parking and road requirements) can reduce housing costs. Increased access and travel choice, and transportation cost savings tend to significantly benefit lower-income households and non-drivers. New Urban designs can reduce some externalities associated with lower-density, automobile-oriented development.
Table 4 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
0 |
Can benefit most groups. |
|
Individuals bear the costs
they impose. |
1 |
Reduces some external costs
associated with dispersed land development and automobile dependency. |
|
Progressive with respect to
income. |
2 |
Can make transportation and
housing more affordable. |
|
Benefits transportation
disadvantaged. |
3 |
Can improve access and
travel choices for non-drivers. |
|
Improves basic mobility. |
3 |
Can improve basic mobility
and access. |
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
New Urbanism design features are appropriate in any urban or suburban area, particularly those experiencing high levels of growth and problems associated with housing inaffordability and sprawl. They are implemented primarily by regional and local governments, and developers.
Table 5 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
3 |
Federal government. |
1 |
|
High-density, urban. |
3 |
State/provincial
government. |
2 |
|
Medium-density, urban/suburban. |
3 |
Regional government. |
3 |
|
Town. |
3 |
Municipal/local government. |
3 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
2 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
3 |
|
Commercial center. |
3 |
Individual business. |
2 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
3 |
Developer. |
3 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
3 |
Neighborhood association. |
3 |
|
|
|
Campus. |