CNU NOW: A Portrait of New Urbanism - Clip 1

[DfunkymonkK]

A lot comments I see from anti-new urbanists tend to say, in one form or another, that New Urbanism is being forced upon people, and this is completely wrong. The current situation is closer to the opposite; suburbs are subsidized (through taxes, paying for infrastructure etc), meaning people are being forcibly inclined to live in the burbs.

[DrummerBoyJason]

Who is that speaking at 3:40? I recognize Duany and Kunstler and the rest, but I don't recognize her.

[loukreu]

@Scottit

I see from visiting your profile that you live in Chicago :) Congrats - one of the nicest US cities. And one that embodies many New Urbanist principles. Many of the outlying towns have their own centers.

[loukreu]

@Scottit

I now live in Hawthorne, CA (south-LA) and I have no center and am forced to drive for all but one pharmacy, one bar, three (grubby, ugly) restaurants, five dentists, and (yay!) an auto parts store. No comparison to my home in Ireland.

What is your stake in this argument? Do you have any Ideals of the suburban life you advocate? I'd love to hear your point of view. Where do you live now? Do you like it?

[Scottit]

@loukreu Liberty & the free market is my stake. I live in downtown San Jose. I grew up in suburban Chicago, with lots of space.

[loukreu]

@ Scottit

I lived in a house with a huge lawn in south-Dublin for about three years. I was about 20 miles from Dublin. My village had a center with ten restaurants, a library, three pharmacies, three pubs (of course), two hair salons, a grocery, a butchershop, fruit and veg shop, two coffee shops, a bookstore, schools and much more, all on a single street eight minutes walk from my door! It was a distinct pleasure to walk down to the center. Beautiful, small streets with low-speed traffic.

[loukreu]

@Scottit

I'm not advocating regression, I'm advocating progress. I saw your comment about social engineering. Actually, this urbanism being discussed is a return to a thousand-year-old tradition of building human-scale towns. Suburbanism is the biggest social engineering experiment ever conducted.

[Scottit]

@loukreu Low density living is not a social engineering experiment.

People like nature & personal space.

[mistaspot1]

@Scottit People, on average, prefer New Urban neighborhoods. All neighborhoods are planned by a developer. Suburbs are no less "social engineering" than New Urban neighborhoods. In fact, I think it's more accurate to call suburbs "subrurals" because there's really nothing urban about them. They have more in common with rural places than urban ones.

[prothobs]

Cyrus992:

I don't think you get it. Sprawl simply cannot accommodate us all. Also, you are abusing the word freedom. The freedom you speak of is not so much freedom but entitlement. You say "the freedom to have single family home with a yard around it!!". I for one, would love a castle of my own.

Planners are looking at ways to give us a sense of family, green space that accommodate humans with out costing insane amounts of money and plundering the environment.

[Scottit]

@prothobs Sprawl can accomodate. Currently, 80% of the US population live on only 75,000 sq.mi. (<3% of the contiguous states).

Your castle examples is ridiculous. It's not about "want". If you have the money, go for it.

[prothobs]

@Scottit

Yeah its about roads, sewer systems, transit, electricity... bringing it all out to a suburb. It's way more expensive and irresponsible. We have to build a city that will be viable in 200 years. If we have no cars in your sprawled out shit hole, we are fucked. I am not saying that we all need to live in Manhattan, but having a yard is not a 'right' or in anyway associated with 'freedom'. "Move to Europe because America is for trucks and bungalows". Fuck off. You're the kind of person

[Scottit]

@prothobs I see high density & I see a shithole. Why are you forcing your desires on others? It makes no sense for you to type" fuck off". What's with the violence? I'm for liberty. You are not.

The US has plenty of space; 80% of people live in the urbanized 3%.

Suburbs pay for their infrastructure. BTW high density cities are more expensive on just about all accounts.

[prothobs]

@Scottit

That's fine. Like whatever you want. One of the most intolerable things is condemning that someone is "not for liberty" because they want to regulate anything. So all of North America (you're talking about the States I guess) be one giant free for all to make sure that we are not infringing on anyone's freedom?

As for the statistic you give, I'm assuming you mean that 80% (urbanized ones) of US residents live on 3% of the entire land? Imagine if all of those residents moved out to the

[Scottit]

@prothobs Typical statist, to argue about the extremes.

Anarchy is not being adovacted.

How would there be a free for all? That would infringe on others' rights.

It is not argued for the urbanized land to increase from 3% to even 5%.

Do you realize that at suburban densities, another 150 million people can live on just another 1% of the land?

[prothobs]

@Scottit

suburbs. The cost of infrastructure to accommodate all those people is staggering, not to mention the size of the highways needed, the amount of cars, and sheer area consumed. Additionally, with suburbs, more likely than not, comes manicured lawns (filled with fertilizer) and pesticides that kill the natural habitat and biomass. You say "I see high density & I see a shithole". That's fine. But you should recognize that it is tried tested and true that there are very livable and

[Scottit]

@prothobs Suburbs are not supported by core cities. In other words, users pay for infrastructure. More people have lived in suburbs than core cities, since 1973.

Higher costs (property, gov, land, labor, construction, etc.) are evident in core cites anyway.

What makes dense cities "sustainable"? You cost savings is actually opposite.

[SniperViper1000]

@Scottit Short-term costs. Not long-term costs.

[prothobs]

@Scottit

sustainable high density areas.

Also, you ask me why the violence? First of all I told you to fuck off, meaning get lost, so that's not exactly violence. You're the one telling someone to "Move to Europe then, Get the hell out!"

[prothobs]

@Scottit

North America so shitty in many aspects. Space is limited and you aren't the center of the planet. I want to help make my city more livable. The city you describe is widely known as 'bad'. Why? Because planners and schools that have studied cities for decades and seen examples all through out history have come to this conclusion. Let's throw it away because you want goddamn sprawl.

[tiefkuhler]

being an European urbanist, it sounds so strange to me that this is even a discussion. New urbanism, here in europe is just Urbanism. there's no alternative to it. sence of Space and belonging + sustainable mobility + mixed uses. there's no other way.

The american dream cul-de-sac nonsense is actually criminal.

[loukreu]

I envy you. I feel like it will take 200 years for even half of the damage done to the public realm of the USA to be undone.

[Scottit]

Move to Europe then,

Get the hell out!

The US has the space for people to have more freedom & property.

[Cyrus992]

Scottit:

Excellent point!! Tell that to people who also want Welfare, Public schools, higher taxes, etc.......

But again....Some who dont want space.... can use the free market to get what they want.....

Other than that..... no policy should destroy the freedom to have single family home with a yard around it!!

[Cyrus992]

Scottit:

Good point! Tell that to those who want public schools, welfare, higher taxes, and more crap!!

[loukreu]

@Scottit

Don't misunderstand me and other New Urbanists. We don't want to put everyone in condos or townhomes in the middle of the town. If people want a house with a lawn - great. There have always been houses with lawns. We just want them built sensibly such that they are built around a town-center, not built in isolated pockets.

[tourdefrance]

@Scottit More freedom? There's nothing free about being isolated in the suburban abyss and being trapped in a car for hours a day. Maybe you're desensitized to it. Think about this, if you live in a suburban neighborhood, you MUST get into your car for EVERY task you must execute within your day. So every time you want to complete a task, you're polluting the Earth and air we breath, and lining the pockets of extremist countries. The only freedom you're using is the freedom to act irresponsibly.

[Scottit]

@loukreu What damage from urbanization?

Go to hunitng & gathering if you like.

[loukreu]

@Scottit

The damage comes from suburbanization, not urbanization.

If you lived in a city like Dublin, London, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam you wouldn't have to ask "what damage". Of all the cities I've been too, the cities that most resemble US cities are in Africa and Mexico. When leaving one's dwelling in the US and entering the public realm, one gets the feeling of entering a war zone. When leaving one's dwelling in Europe, one gets the immediate feeling of walking in a park or shopping mall.

[Scottit]

@loukreu What damage?

Yeah right, US is so like Africa & Mexico.

War zone in US? Yes for Detroit, slightly for St.Louis, Baltimore & other old cities, where people have chosen away from density, towads suburbs.

European living is like living in a shopping mall? Great. What consumersim.

I doubt much parklike setting, due to the high density & litle natural open space.

[alexhlau]

One of the best vids online about new urbanism; thanks for sharing.

[realsamwise]

How about diffrent plans and spread apart?

[realsamwise]

What the heck are you people blathering about sence of place? I don't even know what that is much less care about it. You sound like my wife picking colors for drapes. Who cares?

[funcuz]

What he's saying basically is that a community is more than the sum of its components. Or, think of it like this : Ten houses lines up beside each other. Every house looks the same. With new urbanism, the houses have different plans and are clustered together. See the difference ?

[Scottit]

@funcuz No, what's the difference? Sounds like clustered will block views. How will the roads work? Culdesac?

When are there only a few houses fo a big area, either in line or in a circle?

Sense of place? That's some goofy term that Duany uses to sell his ideas. Good for him, but not for all.

[Scottit]

Good for marketing, for those who want to live that way.

However, CNU & others are trying to force other to live like this. It's social engineering.

[PaulieFetz]

How are they trying to 'force' people? I don't see any guns; and the government already subisidized suburban growth back in the 50s and 60s...isn't that coercion?

[Scottit]

The "force" I'm referring to is limited choice or coercion as you say.

The gov subsidizes central cities more than suburbs.

Lower density pays for itself by the businesses & residences with their taxes. The people living in the suburbs surpassed the amount living in core cites in about 1973.

[Cyrus992]

Scottit:

Duany is presenting his ideas in a free market way not using the government to get what he wants. You would "force" people to do things if it is something done by the government.

His designs like Seaside and Kentlands came true because businesses and residents chose to deal with him therefore they liked his ideas.

Suburbia (and other) in the other hand is not mostly created by firms and is and created by governments therefore it is monopoly with no good reason to innovate.

[Scottit]

Gov coerce people (limiting choice) to live in certain styles via codes.

Construction firms have to follow what the gov says.

Seaside is very little of New Urbanism, just small lots. It's a vacation-town & not even in an UA (urban area). People living there have to drive to work & even for most shopping.

The suburbs are not built or created by government. People choose to live there & like bigger lots & more open space.

All developed countries have suburbs. The US has more due to $ & space.

[Scottit]

Hey Cyrus,you might like my comments to somebody typing nonsense about land use.

Have you looked at O'toole's anti-planner site?

I use my middle name there.

--RSH

[kristertodd]

lower density patently does not pay for it self. When there is no water or food because sub urban lawns have taken up all the arable land and lawn fertilizers and pesticides have killed off any ecological services this will become apparent to you. Some people would rather head that disaster off before we're all dead of starvation (but with BEAUTIFUL front lawns!!)

[Scottit]

Land for ag?

Excuse me, you are ignorant.

Since 1950, 500,000 sq.mi of land has been taken out ag production.

The 80% of the country (avg density 2,700/sq.mi.) live on only 75,00 sq. mi (3% of contiguous states).

There is not a shortage of land for food!

[Cyrus992]

Randall: Sprawl is something created and forced by THE GOVERNMENT RUN PLANNING DEPARTMENTS THAT GIVE US MOSTLY NONSENSE RULES AND REGULATIONS!!!! (ex: zoning laws)

Its best to let the free market design our places. If people like New Urbanism then they should help grow companies like DPZ, if they like sprawl then DPZ will compete, and innovation will arrive!!!

[Scottit]

Duany & Kunstler want people to live their way.

Many people freely choose low density.

Congestion & many other problems result from higher density.

The LA region is the densest urban area in the US.

[kristertodd]

New York is considerably more dense than LA.

[Scottit]

Not by a long shot.

You are off by a factor of at least 20.

You need to pay attention to terms.

What you said, "New York" is a state.

NYC is denser than LA.

I didn't type about "city" densities.

I typed "urban area".

You might be familiar with "metropolitan area", which is similar, but there is a big dif.

Do often type about things that you have little knowledge of?

[Cyrus992]

Scottit:

Basically... I just want an urbanism that is done mostly by the free market... THATS IT....

[Scottit]

Free market has far less zoning, regulations, taxes, coercion, requirements, cost, etc.

Right?

[Cyrus992]

Scottit:

Yes... you are right.... Agian I am for sprawl...... but the layout is a problem that is mostly DICTATED by planning departments...

Single Family Homes, large yards, privacy is a good thing... I respect that.... However... the design could use some free market changes....

[kristertodd]

Scottit,

you said: "The LA region is the densest urban area in the US" I don't know how you could think that I meant New York State when I said New York. Why would I talk about a state when you were talking about and urban area. What I said is actually true. What you're talking about and finding things wrong with are completely idiotic. I think ignorance might be something you want to examine in yourself.

[Scottit]

You missed my point about terms. I was referring to urban area, as mentioned, whereas you, "city." Here's data: UrbanArea Population sq.miles Density Los Angeles 11,789,487 1,668 7,068 SF Oak SJ 4,534,081 688 6,592 New York City 17,799,861 3,353 5,309 Miami, FL 4,919,036 1,116 4,407 Chicago 8,307,904 2,123 3,914 Phoenix 2,907,049 799 3,638 San Diego 2,674,436 782 3,419

[Scottit]

Kristertodd,

I have clearly shown facts, which you are unaware of. How do claim that I am ignorant.

Many statist planners have big gov forceful ideas, but are wrong on many things & have this over-riding nature to change human nature & enforce there hypocritical, unfounded ideology. They often don't look at facts & when they do, use exaggeration, avoidance & twisting.

I stated a simple fact the LA UA is the densest, by far. People in the field are well aware of that.

[kristertodd]

Also,

Moving food production closer to cities, densification and reclamation of land destroyed by unplanned growth have been what most people in urban planning and architecture have been talking about for the last 20-40 years. I think you might want to do some reading after Frank Lloyd Wright. He's turn of the century!

[Scottit]

Transportation cost for food is minimal.

And for food grown in the US, it goes all over the country.

Each urban area does not even come close to having arable land nor climate to be self-sufficient.

You made no point by mentioning Frank Lloyd Wright.

Land is not destroyed.

Urbanized land (<3% of US) is very useful.

Higher density has many negatives, more: crime, congestion/traffic, noise, pollution, cost, stress, etc.

And, less: open space, nature, privacy, yards, independence, etc.

[Scottit]

kristertodd,

Seems like you gave up on upholding your misconceptions & gov coercion ideas, once you were presented with facts.

[tourdefrance]

@Scottit They would LIKE for people to live that way, they're not FORCING people. What they want is the OPTION to build in that way, when current codes won't permit it. When people live in dense areas, they don't need cars to get around, thus, less congestion. When everybody from 20-40 miles away (the suburbs) drives into work, they cause an incredible amount of congestion. This can be observed in all cities. Your logic is completely backwards.

[tourdefrance]

@Scottit There's a misconception in the USA about pollution in dense cities. They are't polluted anymore as they were in the industrial age and the 1900's. The 3rd world countries are taking care of heavy industry & manufacturing. There are no factories in our cities anymore. As far as cars, most people in dense cities don't have cars or use them limitedly. I live in one of the most sprawled cities in America (Phoenix), and we rank #1 in year-round particle pollution - BECAUSE EVERYBODY DRIVES.

[Cyrus992]

@tourdefrance Good points!! Some are FOOLED that NU = urban government control. Myth!! It gives more freedom for transit, living, and choice. Critics like Wendell Cox and Randall O Toole have been MISLEADING people that NU is control, but fail to see the benefits. For years we had big box store, auto, asphalt, and oil lobbyist and public planners to control the way we live setting up NASTY codes to create such an UNATTRACTIVE landscape. I admire Scottit though of his fight for liberty..

[Scottit]

Calthorpe is also against people have free will to live where & how they want.

Some like NU. Duany wants his codes adopted by most cities. That includes a minimum of 10DU/acre, and many denser.

Sure some like that. Many want more of their own larger open space (yards)

[aurzada]

Went to your web page, and really liked Providence to New York clip. Great stuff. Found this on YouTube after visiting there.