2. PCSR 09-13-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

16 Codifying New Urbanism . . Complementary uses set within an interconnected street network bring together essential aspects of community life and minimize reliance on the car. A compact, mixed-use pattern (below)- fundamental to New llrbanism- contrasts 'with the Euclidian separation (above) that characterizes c07nlentional suburban dez1elopment. . While only some ordinances will incorporate every one of the provisions suggested here, most should be incorporated into all ordinances intended to implement New Urbanist principles. Many community leaders want to know what they can do immediately to make their land-use regulations implement New Urbanism. By translat- ing key principles into specific regulatory changes, a community can start to change its development pattern without having to completely overhaul its code. Chapter 2 describes how a local approach can start with strategic changes and then proceed to comprehensive regulatory reform. If the com- munity is committed, some fundamental changes are easy to do, and some can be done in isolation from large-scale changes requiring more time. The signature characteristic of Euclidean zoning-widely used throughout the country-is the separation of uses and their dispersion through minimum lot-size requirements. New Urbanists reverse this approach to bring many activities into proximity; in the interest of convenience, walkability; and liveli- ness. Emphasizing mixed use does not mean eliminating blocks that consist of housing only. Mixed-use neighborhoods traditionally include residential blocks with a variety of densities and housing types within a neighborhood distinguished by many activities within comfortable walking distance of most homes (Figure 1). FIGURE 1. EUCLIDEAN SEPARATION VS. MIXED-USE INTEGRATION EUCLIDEAN SEPARATION MIXED-USE INTEGRATION ~. 9. PEDESTRIAN-FRIEN'~~>K: STREET "..' ,\,,, , ". , , , ,