Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
to socio-economic status, socially exclusive, and divisive. Although New Urbanists
espouse more socially diverse and integrated neighbourhoods, and believe urban
design can achieve this, critics frequently point to the failure to achieve this aim.
Indeed these developments appeal typically to a relatively affluent class looking
for lifestyle appeal, namely self-selected residents, and are typically relatively ex-
pensive. The communities rarely have affordable housing stock, or a diversity of
housing options. The result is that these NU developments, especially the NTD and
UV types, often become socially homogeneous affluent enclaves in which the poor
and visible minorities are excluded and are not the equitable places idealized by
proponents of NU. So despite the rhetoric of social inclusion, diversity, and social
justice, critics suggest that such features rarely occur (Dowling
1998
). Indeed many
critics have suggested that NU proponents do not fully appreciate the power of real
estate interests and their profit motive in shaping the urban fabric, or the ways in
which these interests simply contribute to the social fractionation of the postmodern
world without any intent or desire to change the economic status quo (Foglesong
1986
; Harvey
1994
; Baxandall and Ewen
2000
).
2.7.5
Social Relations and Authentic Community
Talen (
1999
, p. 1363) has reminded us “the essence of new urbanist design theory
is the creation of a sense of community”. So through planning, design codes, ar-
chitectural controls, and restrictive covenants, NU hopes to achieve an urban form
that fosters social interactions, thereby building communities. Many NU develop-
ments include features that are intended to do this. Parks, playgrounds, gazebos,
bandstands, civic centres and main-street shops, supposedly become the nexus for
the development of these relationships. Also, NU domestic architecture typically
rejects the front snout-garage style, so typical of the post-1960s suburb, replac-
ing it with street-facing features such as front porches, in anticipation of enhanced
neighbouring, and eyes-on-the-street surveillance of children. Yet there are very
few studies that have systematically examined whether or not social relations and
levels of community experience are enhanced in NU developments, and no studies
have explored the issue using comprehensive frameworks of community dimen-
sions that recognize that there are multiple dimensions within the behaviour, cogni-
tion and affect domains that constitute urban communities (Davies
1992
; Davies
and Herbert
1993
). Indeed critics suggest that there is little evidence that NU deliv-
ers on enhanced social relations and authentic community experiences. In part this
criticism centres around the various strains of determinism, in environment, design
and architectural senses, that underpins so much of the NU approach, which as-
sumes that design can achieve social objectives (Bookout
1992
; Hall
2000
). This is
essentially the same scepticism made in the 1950s about the assumption that new
designs would 'usher in' communities in post-war British new towns. In any case
many researchers since Suttles (
1972
) believe the community is socially, not materi-
ally constructed. Indeed Talen (
1999
) notes that in NU, sense of place seems to be
focused on image congruity rather than on the more important features of affect and
place attachment.
