Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This guy thinks he has a case. I haven't finished reading it, so I'm not sure how I feel about his argument but it seems pretty structured. I don't think he's promoting suburbanization, but rather he believes that the goals sought after by urbanists will not be achieved by New Urbanism. It's also 15 years old so some of the stuff may be outdated, but he can't be the only guy who thought that New Urbanism may not work.
Sarcasm doesn't walys come across in the written form.
I think the best criticism of New Urbanism is New Urbanism itself. And I use that in the broad sense, as in constructive criticism would certainly be included.
Laguna West in Elk Grove, CA, and Mountain House, CA, are two examples of New Urbanism that basically ended up aborted mid-term. Laguna west gets cited from time to time as a progressive example of new urbanism, but is it really? It was definitely forward thinking for its time, but now is more typical of most new suburban construction. Without light rail, it's obviously car-dependent. Mountain House is a little newer, but still dated. Again, the transit connections were never built and with the real estate bubble it get left in this weird half completed stated. So it's really just a residential-only exurb. It was still built to be a New Urbanism development, but the reality didn't (or at least hasn't) panned out that way.
Sarcasm doesn't walys come across in the written form.
I think the best criticism of New Urbanism is New Urbanism itself. And I use that in the broad sense, as in constructive criticism would certainly be included.
Laguna West in Elk Grove, CA, and Mountain House, CA, are two examples of New Urbanism that basically ended up aborted mid-term. Laguna west gets cited from time to time as a progressive example of new urbanism, but is it really? It was definitely forward thinking for its time, but now is more typical of most new suburban construction. Without light rail, it's obviously car-dependent. Mountain House is a little newer, but still dated. Again, the transit connections were never built and with the real estate bubble it get left in this weird half completed stated. So it's really just a residential-only exurb. It was still built to be a New Urbanism development, but the reality didn't (or at least hasn't) panned out that way.
I had this feeling BajanYankee was being sarcastic, but I didn't want to call it out and then be wrong haha. And yeah, I was look at Laguna on Google Maps and I was having a hard time seeing how it was so special without any real form of transit or the usually commercial development that goes along with some of the other New Urbanist communities I've seen.
Denver's premiere NU development, Stapleton, is not hewing to the NU line so much these days:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77
Another vote for Stapleton if you don't mind a semi suburban feel and are not looking for an older neighborhood (mature trees).
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami
Both areas are, in my eyes, turning in to a disappointment. If you're looking for standard suburban living in the city, well they'll fit the bill...but Stapleton has been dropping the "Walkability" ball for some time now in pursuit of dollars, despite their stated objective.
All the empty promises of town centers and main streets just haven't come to fruition, and I'm finding it harder to distinguish Stapleton / CG from Highlands Ranch...I think Stapleton is still better, but the differences are becoming more marginal over time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77
Stapleton is not walkable in terms of shops. There are tons of families around. It has a dry suburban feel. Small trees because the oldest one is <20 years old. There are lots of parks in walking distance, but you will have to get in your car to go anywhere.
Conservatory Green is closer to a big retail development so in my opinion it will be much more walkable.
It's nice, it's new, it's safe (mostly), it has good schools, lots of parks , rec centers, but it is all about families. Really families with kids.
If you guys are planning to start a family soon, it would be a great place. You work location makes it even more attractive.
My wife and I lived there for a few months before we had kids and we couldn't stand it. Compared to the older city neighborhoods it is not very walkable. The bar and restaurant offering is pretty poor compared to the older areas of the city.
I was up in Northfield yesterday and got to see the new Conservatory Green development going in. This location's proximity to the Northfield shops means it is going to be much more walkable than older Stapleton is.
And then there's Bradburn:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradburn1
Well my neighborhood, Bradburn Village, has that in abundance, but we are north of I-70 and our location at 120th and Sheridan would make for a hellish commute for you (although I do have a neighbor who does it--he commutes to the Denver Tech Center--and he says yes, it sucks!, but they love living here so much he puts up with it).
I don't know of any communities personally down south that are that way in your price range but I can give you one piece of advice: one way to find it is to drive around a neighborhood you are interested in and stop and ask people who are out walking what they think of their neighborhood. I feel this is the only true way to really find out if a neighborhood has this elusive, but to me, essential quality. And you are right, I have friends who live in Stapleton and they say it has that quality. I'm sure there are other communities though farther south that will too, it might just take some investigation.
Good luck in your community quest!
So someone drives from Bradburn to the DTC, a distance of 27 miles, to live in an NU development.
I personally like WALKABLE Dallas-Fort Worth. He's kind of one-note (hard not to be in a city like Dallas), but he often uses statistical models and numbers rather than just 'feel'. Obviously you can disagree with his formulas and statistics, but in my opinion moves the discussion from a you vs them to something of an academic/factual discussion.
I personally like WALKABLE Dallas-Fort Worth. He's kind of one-note (hard not to be in a city like Dallas), but he often uses statistical models and numbers rather than just 'feel'. Obviously you can disagree with his formulas and statistics, but in my opinion moves the discussion from a you vs them to something of an academic/factual discussion.
Great blog! I also like austincontrarian.com for local discussion of mostly urban issues with a strong emphasis on the inter-play with economic issues.
bettercities.org is another source for good information.
Urbanist blogs/forums...welll, the usual suspects have been listed but here are two more:
Skyscraper Page and Skyscraper City.
An adolescent 'my dick is bigger than your dick" boosterish aspect to these, yet there is good city-related discussion on the subforums.
Regionally Urban Ohio is a good urbanist forum for Ohio (the home page is more a pix site)
I think the different Ohio cities have urbanist blogs/discussion sites, too. I think there is an Urban Cincy for Cincinnati, and I used to host one for Dayton.
There used to be Broken Sidewalk for Louisville, but I think its inactive
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
