(cont)

Evidence that new urbanism does not address the issue of providing a place for lower income people is in the literature surrounding it. For instance, an article in the New York Times entitled “Why New Urbanism Isn’t for Everyone” discusses downfalls of these developments that include people wanting big back yards, swimming pools, and the desire to escape high density living” (Johnson). The article also discusses the inconveniences of the new urbanist lifestyle, such as increased walking and more emphasis on community oriented thinking. These are the moans of the rich and the lazy. Other problems include quarrels between residents. “Developers have found that residential, retail, and office users compete for parking, the essential columns in multi-story buildings interfere with an open-store layout used by retailers, and residents complain about noise from delivery trucks” (Gogoi). What is ignored in all this is that along with any new theory comes the need to work out problems that are only found when test of the theory are carried out, in this case when people inhabit the development. New urbanism demands for its residents to work collectively to solve these problems instead of people pointing out annoyances while doing nothing to change them. New urbanism is a design that is supposed to encourage community involvement and local mindedness, yet people who inhabit these developments seem to live partitioned off from one another. The focus of society, especially in (progressive and) planned communities needs to be taken away from individual wealth and status with those same values placed on a network of people. If people were spending a much higher percentage of their money within a mile or two from their residence they will be more likely to see that money spent benefiting both directly and indirectly. The beauty of new urbanism is not the architecture, but how people interact with one another within their social environment.

(cont)

“Social justice is a movement based on fair treatment of all people and a just share of the benefits of society” (www.wikipedia.org). This statement poignantly addresses the uneven distribution of wealth in today’s world and naturally demands that sustainability standards meet social requirements that include all citizens. A pattern in today’s society shows that city planning efforts heavily weigh the economic impact of possible uses for land. We have recently seen a housing boom that has concentrated on middle and upper class housing, and new urbanism developments are no different. New urbanism needs to remain loyal to the ideals of social justice to be considered a sustainable model of development that will be a viable option for planning future urban sites. I do not intend to dismiss new urbanism whatsoever, on the contrary, I am only analyzing this method to better understand the role of sustainable development in social organization. A major force influencing the role of new urbanism in a sustainable society is property values in the area of development. A problem with this is that these communities “offer no mechanism to ensure any stock - never mind an adequate, permanent stock - of affordable housing” (Roseland 143). If we wish to advertise the benefits of new urbanism to everyone we must be able to provide access to these developments for people of all income levels.

random 2.5 pages, not in order

Where Are The Poor in New Urbanism
New Urbanism has been touted as the sustainable development model for planning communities, but where are the poor in these developments? This community design does not address economic class for the people living there the way it addresses environmental issues wherever “there” happens to be. We need to accommodate an area that encompasses more than just mixed use; sustainable development calls for mixed users. If we planned all of our urban areas according to the New Urbanism model we would be forgetting a major part of the population and ignoring our duty to provide sustainably for all people. Sustainability protects the environment in a very complete manner, but environmentalism is not the primary purpose energizing this theory. The call for social justice is the bottom line in a sustainable world. Environmental justice is a complement to sustainable human society. Because this approach provides our species with the highest quality of life we strive to have a symbiotic, rather than a parasitic relationship with our home planet.