Another Perception of New Urbanism

Monday, March 6, 2006

This other percpetion of New Urbanism is by a black architect friend. I mention race here because it has a lot to do with how different life experiences see things. That would be true if I had heard it from various other ethnic, racial, and public interest groups. But I think it is worth listening to because NU needs to take a look at itself, to learn to know what additional development of its ideas and message is necessary to make its goals and protocols of practice more widely understood and accepted.

My friend said:

1. The movement is identified with one person, Andres. To my friend, he becomes perceived as a "cult" leader. He added that this is true of all other architecture, planning, and urban design movements. Movements themselves, he added, take on a "position" that immediately sets itself either apart from or superior to other movements, hence this kind of tribal competition.
2. He perceives NU as white and elitist. That is partly due to its apparent racial composition and the fact that NU takes no strong position of effective programs to fund "affordable housing" and produce a significant supply on a regular schedule, this among other prominent issues having to do with supporting and pushing for effective public transit subsidies, the true integration of the enivronment movement into NU, and so on.
3. The persistent argument about the best architectural style to accomplish urbanism is an unnecessary diversion from the implementation of its goals. and it sets up a disccusion that is way off understanding NU core goals.
4. Finally, he contends, too many of the built NU projects look the same: the New England green, a green mall, small town shopping streets, and a high density core that often is a key hole configuration. He feels that the solutions are more suburban in subject matter, rather than dense urban related. His point is that there are other urban design solutions that keep to NU principles but that are different for local different reasons. Finally,
5. There needs to be social impact analysis, that is, how the proposed urban design plan affects all income groups and cultural groups, in terms of housing, education, jobs, the provision of social-welfare and medical and social services, etc. He added, on my prompting, that impact analysis should also include fiscal and environmental impacts, particularly in the case of the Gulf Coast, such as the effects of annual and cumulative rising of water levels that may eventually engulf towns and cities in that belt. In conclusion, NU has become a club of like minded movement members to which other non-members and orginal founders are not included as equals.

Whether or not NU agrees with or takes strong objections to these observations and perceptions is irrelevant to the reality here that someone outside the movement, who truly supports its goals, practices, and standards, sees NU differently. And not necessarily altogether favorably. Since NU wants to have as many interests "under the tent", these observations shine the light on very specific changes NU should make give more than token lip service to considering and important relevance of other ideas and perceptions.

In fact, it cannot rest on its laurels and achievements gained so far. And it must expand its urban design ideas and give active support to government and private sector coalitions to actually carry out its goals.

On a personal note, I have persistently commented on many of the issues my friend has outlined so clearly. Any "movement" gets pretty clubbish after a while, if for no other reasons than a sense of arrogance sets in and divergent opinions are dismissed sometimes and sometimes not in a positive way. Further, a movement sets up competition with other competing "movements" where the debate is more one of which has the superior ideas and achievements, rather than a studied consideration of how those divergent ideas can be melded into a more inclusive and intelligent NU movement.

This is not a rock throwing effort on my part to distinguish myself as being someone with very strong (read competing) ideas. Rather it is to say that NU has to keep rethinking itself in measurable ways and expand its ideas by taking seriously the need to implement its goals on the ground for everyone of color, of different ethnic groups, of different incomes, and with different life experiences. This is not to recommend that NU becomes a political lobbying group. It is more like being practical and addressing just what specifically it takes to implement its goals on the ground and in terms of the people and interests it affects.

A melding of measuring social and other impacts with the kind of theoretical framework that Christopher Alexander has produced has the potential of strengthening NU and making its case to a wider audience, especially those who oppose it just because it may be a better idea that makes them feel less with their flimsy and self-referential goals and principles. These analytic approaches give NU designers a more complete picture of place and the people whose plans will affect them most directly.

I have enormous respect for my friend, his well-thought out ideas, and his goals that reach beyond his own ego and the need for personal accomplishment and recognition. He's talking about everyone and not just a well-intentioned and well-honed movement.

Comments

[john massengale]

Konrad,

What you say is true.

There's also the problem of the critics being uninformed and displaying the biases of architecture.

For example, "the fact that NU takes no strong position of effective programs to fund "affordable housing" and produce a significant supply on a regular schedule." What about all the work that went into the Hope VI program? All the work that's done with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Or all the work that's gone into reintroducing and relegalizing affordable units like granny flats, mews housing, live works and apartments over the store? We will never have enough affordable housing as long as we buy into the argument that everyone must have their own single-family house.

Or what about practises like Urban Design Associates? The majority of their work is for affordable housing on urban and brownfill sites. Maybe some of your friend's criticism is simply uninformed. Does he know that the Gulf Coast charrette had a social justice team and an environmental team? Or is he just assuming the worst because that is the norm among many architects?

Architects also attribute work to heroic architects, because Modernism taught us to do that (imagine how Lizz must feel). In fact, New Urbanism rejects the model of the Heroic Architect in favor or team work. That's what the 200 person Gulf Coast charrette was all about: only a movement that stresses collegiality could have produced so much from so many people in such a short time. There simply wasn't time for one person of one office to try to determine what was done.

John

[Douglas Willinger]

What about the Washington DC highway planning-anti-planning that places a disproportionate amount of the vehicular traffic through less affluent Anacostia?

Or NYC with its pushing the traffic more through the Cross Bronx Expressway instead of spreading the burden?