Editing New Urbanism (section)

==Criticism==
{{Globalize|date=February 2010}}
New Urbanism has drawn both praise and criticism from all parts of the [[political spectrum]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Sharifi|first1=Ayyoob|title=From Garden City to Eco-urbanism: The quest for sustainable neighborhood development|journal=Sustainable Cities and Society|volume=20|pages=1–16|date=September 2015|doi=10.1016/j.scs.2015.09.002}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ellis |first1=Cliff |title=The New Urbanism: Critiques and Rebuttals |journal=Journal of Urban Design |date=2002 |volume=7 |issue=3 |pages=261–291 |doi=10.1080/1357480022000039330}}</ref> It has been criticized both for being a [[social engineering (political science)|social engineering]] scheme and for failing to address social equity and for both restricting private enterprise and for being a deregulatory force in support of private sector developers.

Journalist [[Alex Marshall (Journalist)|Alex Marshall]] has decried New Urbanism as essentially a marketing scheme that repackages conventional suburban sprawl behind a façade of nostalgic imagery and empty, aspirational slogans.<ref>See, ''e.g.'', Alex Marshall, "Building New Urbanism: Less Filling, But Not So Tasty", ''Builder Magazine'', 30 November 1999, p. ___. Print; archived on Marshall's web site, http://www.alexmarshall.org/2006/08/02/building-new-urbanism-less-filling-but-not-so-tasty/. Retrieved 1 November 2013.</ref> In a 1996 article in [[Metropolis (architecture magazine)|''Metropolis'' magazine]], Marshall denounced New Urbanism as "a grand fraud".<ref>Alex Marshall, "Suburbs in Disguise", ''Metropolis Magazine'', July 1996, p. 70, republished as "New Urbanism" in Busch, Akiko, ed., ''Design is&nbsp;... Words, Things, People, Buildings and Places'' (New York:Metropolis Books/Princeton Architectural Press, 2002), p. 272; and as "Suburbs in Disguise" on Marshall's web site, http://www.alexmarshall.org/2007/08/31/suburbs-in-disguise/, retrieved 2 October 2013.</ref> The attack continued in numerous articles, including an opinion column in ''The Washington Post'' in September of the same year,<ref>{{Cite web |title=WashingtonPost.com: Putting Some 'City' Back in the Suburbs |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/library/growth/solutions/nokent.htm |access-date=2023-08-08 |website=www.washingtonpost.com}}</ref> and in Marshall's first book, ''How Cities Work: Suburbs, Sprawl, and the Roads Not Taken''.<ref>U. of Texas Press 2000.{{Cite web |url=http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/books/marhow |title=How Cities Work - University of Texas Press |access-date=19 November 2013 |archive-date=30 October 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161030161406/http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/books/marhow |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Critics have asserted that the effectiveness claimed for the New Urbanist solution of mixed income developments lacks statistical evidence.<ref>Popkin, S. et al. (2004) A Decade of HOPE VI. The Urban Institute</ref> Independent studies have supported the idea of addressing poverty through mixed-income developments,<ref>Goetz, Edward G. (2003) Clearing the Way: Deconcentrating the Poor in Urban America, The Urban Institute Press: Washington, DC</ref><ref>Chaskin, R.J., Joseph, M.L., Webber, H.S. (2007) The Theoretical Basis for Addressing Poverty Through Mixed-Income Development. Urban Affairs Review 42 (3): 369–409.</ref> but the argument that New Urbanism produces such diversity has been challenged from findings from one community in Canada.<ref>Grant, J. and K. Perrott (2009) Producing diversity in a new urbanism community. Town Planning Review 80 (3): 267–289.</ref>

Some parties have criticized the New Urbanism for being too accommodating of motor vehicles and not going far enough to promote cleaner modes of travelling such as walking, cycling, and public transport. The Charter of the New Urbanism states that "communities should be designed for the pedestrian and transit as well as the car".<ref name="The Charter of the New Urbanism">{{cite web|url=http://www.cnu.org/charter|title=The Charter of the New Urbanism|date=2015-04-20}}</ref> Some critics suggest that communities should exclude the car altogether in favor of [[Car-free movement|car-free developments]]. Steve Melia proposes the idea of "filtered permeability" (see [[Permeability (spatial and transport planning)]]) which increases the connectivity of the pedestrian and cycling network resulting in a time and convenience advantage over drivers while still limiting the connectivity of the vehicular network and thus maintaining the safety benefits of cul de sacs and horseshoe loops in resistance to property crime.<ref>[http://www.stevemelia.co.uk/ltt.htm "Neighbourhoods Should be Made Permeable for Walking and Cycling but not for Cars"], Steve Melia, Local Transport Today, January 23, 2008</ref>

In response to critiques of a lack of evidence for the New Urbanism's claimed environmental benefits, a rating system for neighborhood environmental design, [[LEED-ND]], was developed by the [[U.S. Green Building Council]], [[Natural Resources Defense Council]], and the [[Congress for the New Urbanism]] (CNU),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cnu.org/leednd |title=LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) &#124; Congress for the New Urbanism |access-date=2014-10-22 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014174711/http://www.cnu.org/leednd |archive-date=2014-10-14 }}</ref> to quantify the sustainability of New Urbanist neighborhood design.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usgbc.org/articles/getting-know-leed-neighborhood-development|title=Getting to know LEED: Neighborhood Development|date=1 January 2014}}</ref> New Urbanist and board member of CNU [[Doug Farr]] has taken a step further and coined [[Sustainable Urbanism]], which combines New Urbanism and LEED-ND to create walkable, transit-served urbanism with high performance buildings and infrastructure.

Criticizing the lack of evidence for low greenhouse gas emissions results, Susan Subak<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nebraskapress.unl.edu/university-of-nebraska-press/9780803296886/|title=The Five-Ton Life|last=Subak|first=Susan|publisher=University of Nebraska Press|date=2018}}</ref> has pointed out that while New Urbanism emphasizes walkability and building variety, it is the scale of dwellings, especially the absence of large houses that may determine successful, low carbon outcomes at the community level.

New Urbanism has been criticized for being a form of centrally planned, large-scale development, "instead of allowing the initiative for construction to be taken by the final users themselves".<ref>[http://p2pfoundation.net/Brief_History_of_P2P-Urbanism "A brief history of Peer-to-peer Urbanism"], Nikos Salingaros and Federico Mena-Quintero, October 2010</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=February 2021}} It has been criticized for asserting universal principles of design instead of attending to local conditions.<ref>Grant, J. (2006) Planning the Good Community: New Urbanism in Theory and Practice. London: Routledge</ref>