REAL Exclusive Magazine

The Conflict: New Urbanistic Vs. ‘Pseudo Urbanistic’

By William Henry, PhD

The Conflict Between ‘The New Urbanistic Approach Embraced By Government Urban Planners Vs. The ‘Pseudo Urbanistic’–Market Rate Approach Implemented By The Private Sector

Consumers and casual observers will note that the various urban plans currently being fostered by government officials and private commercial developer/builders vary greatly in both the substance and style of the plans. The differences are significant! As may be expected, government seems of late to be enamored with the creation of a ‘new urbanism’ with mixed zoning uses all clustered together creating ‘mixed use urban centers’. Unlike single use zoning districts—typical of post World War ll suburbia-these plans and resulting urban environments reflect the idea that home life, work, play, education and retail shopping activities can and no longer should be separated into sometimes sterile residential tracts and business areas.

New Urbanism Is Really Old Urbanism

There are many psychological theories which seem to back the ‘new urbanism movement’. This is really more akin to the old American and European urbanism when many residents lived above their stores or places of work. Many small town advocates fondly remember the pedestrian friendly environments of earlier years without the eco unfriendly auto dominated city scapes that we find today. In their world view the ultimate refection of the non-politically correct American is to drive his/her piece of unfriendly private property onto the public rights of way ‘ROW’. Often viewed as ‘rolling private estates’ cars are becoming very self contained. The driver can now live– eat- work– be entertained– in his/her own rich exclusive private world amidst the city public squalor.

Private Autos On Public Rights Of Way

Some government officials and some politicians question what right do private citizens have to put their rolling private worlds on public streets which public dollars are used to fund. Isn’t the public right of way the province of government and shouldn’t the government more or less plan and control the infrastructure? Today the move of government is to collectivize transportation and limit access via auto.

Napoleon and Pope Sixtus the Great planned Paris and Rome respectively in order to control the masses. Napoleon did so by bull dozing (via horsepower) large swaths of private dwellings to fashion large avenues (Champs Elysees) that armies could march down and Sixtus who ordained that ceremonial processions be held near the Vatican. Likewise residential developments were cleared in order to make way for State/Religious functions for the faithful. Large promenades became instruments of governmental control.

American Thoroughfares Are Unlike European Ones

Eventually in America, the idea of large roads came about due to private auto use– not State control. But now government interests are reverting to the European model by fostering public transportation and attempting to limit the presence of the auto in the most urbanized areas.

The Move Towards Mixed Income Housing

Concurrently the removal of zoning barriers compromises yet another vestige of the private sector in downtown cores—oversized executive home sites. Local governments attempt to spur mixed income housing near urban cores and remove oversize lot zoning. Transients brought in by public transit occupy urban turf in higher income demographic areas. Now the battle ensues between the NIMBY crowds (not in my back yard) with the collectivists who feel that to deny access to anyone is tantamount to discrimination. This is the purview of the Federal Fair Housing Act legislation.

Government Vision Plans Are Not Meant To Be Feasible Initially

When government planners today advocate new urbanism they usurp the role of the private sector and the ‘vision plan’, while exciting– becomes unfeasible. This tendency is not the sole domain of either political party. If left to their own devices, instead of assessing the actual market driving forces, they create unbuildable and/or unsuccessful projects where investors are damaged.

Whether it’s a mayor who wants to capture sales tax dollars by fostering the over supply of retail facilities; government officials who buy into the idea that renters are not really citizens in the community in which they occupy and compound the error by mandating that only for sale housing be allowed; or uber urbanites that sees high rise developments with structured parking in his/her suburban jurisdiction with unanchored boutique retail stores below, all of them are unwittingly falling into the same trap. Instead of spurring economic development, they will see a waste of public dollars in edifies that go dark at night and can be seen through by day!

Government Visions Should Be Tempered With Private Sector Reality–‘The Urban Consensus Plan’

Therefore I encourage developers and builders to push back against these ‘political new urbanite vision plans’. To the degree that these ‘vision plans’ help build constituencies for redevelopment, they serve their purpose. However the governing agencies that foster them should take a step back and accept modifications that will make these vision plans more feasible. The term ‘pseudo-suburban’ is a less than suitable description of a government ‘vision plan’ made more market ready and feasible. I suggest a term called an urban consensus plan to properly describe the end game of the give and take between the push of government visions and private sector push back.

William Henry PhD is the Principal in Charge of RGA-Design, LLC a full service architectural and interior design firm that has served as the architect of record for over 1,000 projects across the State of Florida (Registration number AA0003523). He has lectured and written widely on the above topic. His most recent publication is ‘Return of the Master Builder’ available on Amazon Kindle e Books. Henry’s contact information is whenry@rga-design.com; (813-226-2220 Ext204) or visit the company web site at www.rga-design .com or www.buildingdoctorfl.com.

Copyright © 2014 REAL Exclusive Magazine
Links to this article are encouraged