New urbanism serves as a great model for building neighborhoods, communities and towns that embody walkability, complexity, and diversity. When done right, as Andres Duany reminds us, they are calibrated to their place, which is often missing in many cookie-cutter new urbanism communities. While prescriptive, they allow for flexibility and a way to opt out of the process.
The irony here is that these principles and attributes mirror very closely those of conservation biology and restoration ecology; imagine that! Yet for the most part, new urbanism is practiced in an ecological vacuum. ‘Open’ spaces (I hate that term, but that’s a discussion for another day) and set aside ‘environmental sensitive areas’ are often plotted with absolutely no science behind their shape, size, distance from one another, or quality in terms of their ability to support native flora and fauna. In fact, more often then not they probably become sinks of biological & genetic diversity.
As far as I can see, there is no reason why new urbanism shouldn’t fully embrace the concepts of landscape connectivity, species movements and migrations, and habitat conservation, without compromising the enduring qualities these communities provide. Let’s work together and figure this out.
Further ReadingPandemic Pause
E+D Podcast with Keith Bowers: The state of ecology and design in landscape architecture
Living Infrastructure: Green is great, but alive is even better
Water, Equity, and Ecology in Urban Planning
Composting Toilets: When Nature Calls
More From This AuthorCOP10 Final post from Nagoya, Japan: Sharing a moving plea from a Sudanese cattleman
A Major Flaw in Sustainability in Land Development
It’s a mistake to think that command and control engineering will make us safe from future storms
Rewilding and the Musuem of Modern Art – Really!
There Is No Sustainability Without Ecology