Pages

Thursday, July 30, 2009

"Walkability" is not a plan, but a buzzword

A Seattleite uses his community as a case for showing the arrogance of urban planning and the slippery terms of New Urbanism:
Urban planners, often in a theoretical world by themselves, say they are attempting to create a more functional city. They talk about walkability associated with transportation planning while others point to creating sustainable high-density neighborhoods. Unfortunately, as much as urban planners and lawmakers bandy about the term, it still has meanings that change depending on who you ask, where you ask, and how affluent is the person you ask ....

Is it possible to draw a circle on a map, designate it as a sustainable walkable neighborhood, and have it be economically viable for the small business person? Planners say, “sure, just create more housing units.” New jargon calls them “urban villages,” “urban centers,” TODs (transit-oriented developments), sustainable communities, or walkable neighborhoods ....

They didn’t come to grips with the reality that they can’t force a business to locate or thrive in these new areas. Most urban planners and most elected officials have never run a small business. They simply don’t understand what it takes to operate a retail store successfully ....

If walkability and healthy neighborhoods are the goal, then planners need to make some major changes in how they do their job. The first logical step might be to incorporate the Hippocratic oath into their decision-making: “Do no harm.” That means hanging on to the neighborhoods and stores that still function ....

If a neighborhood is thriving, talk to the shopkeepers who have been successful for a number of years. Listen to them. More important is not doing something that makes success more difficult. Maybe the city should pay less attention to the big downtown business leaders and the Chamber of Commerce. They may know how to run WAMU or sell luxury downtown condos, but not many know how to run small shops in neighborhoods any more than do planners. And, though it should be obvious, not all neighborhoods are alike. Each has its own demographic and character and neighborhood mainstays.
It is strong arguments like this that have had me re-thinking my own commitments to New Urbanism. If nothing else, looking at the problems of detached urban planning cause me to show more chastened and qualified support for New Urbanism. Walkability seems to be a term that holds a gaggle of unjustified class and culture assumptions that should not go unchallenged or untested.

1 comment: