1.  Before World War II, urban planning was based on the pedestrian. Through logical planning based on the ideal that one can walk or take mass transit to any of his daily needs. Public investment in infrastructure was in the form of streetcars, subways, trains etc.

2.  After World War II, urban planning became based on the automobile. Government policy and racial undertone pushed the population out of the central city into the suburbs. The mixes of uses in the central city became segmented where people lived in one area, shopped in another, and worked in another. The car was required to travel these distances. Public investment, especially from the federal government, was devoted mainly to highways and roads.

3.  A new paradigm emerged called New Urbanism that sought to bring back the ideals of traditional urbanism.  When introduced, the environment was such that New Urbanism could not break into mainstream thinking in urban planning.  They found someone who saw the value and the Founders of this movement designed the now famous Seaside, Florida. New Urbanism is currently fighting to get past the impression that it is elitist and nostalgic. 

5.  Now, to get past that impression is to understand that traditional urbanism can fix existing downtowns and bring smart, dense development to the suburbs. Take the concepts of urbanism and apply them to these markets.

6.  How can these concepts be incorporated into the suburbs?  Changing the mindset of everyone involved.  Educating city leaders, civic leaders and residents, making them understand that if they keep embracing the suburban model, they will be passed by nearby cities who more proactively embrace traditional urban concepts.

7.  Who incorporates them?  It takes like-minded developers, planners, architects and receptive, educated city leaders.  Developers must use political will to make city leaders grasp that, in the long view, this is the way to plan their growth.

8.  A project in Naperville, Illinois is exactly an example of this urbanization of a suburb. The project’s aim is to add density and expand the existing vibrant, yet small downtown to include another district that includes great buildings on great streets and a plaza.  We met initial resistance from the establishment, but currently nearly all are convinced.  In the end, this project will be of great benefit to the community.

9.  A project in Northern Indiana is an example of an infill project that turned momentum for a depressed downtown.  The City had plans to demolish this block of historic buildings to make way for new development.  Now, the buildings are being adapted to new uses and starting to bring people back to the Downtown. 

Neighborhoods can be planned to make it possible to walk to any everyday destination within a fifteen-minute walk. This proximity of amenities is achieved by incorporating zoning that requires a certain density with mixed uses. The availability of public transportation is key to creating cities with great pedestrian-based neighborhoods. If public transportation is available, people will then be able to utilize public transportation to go to work in the larger commercial center or to another destination in the city.

In general, pedestrian-based neighborhoods are able to provide a full range of services in a relatively small area, thus creating more space for more-defined green areas of nature. Large cities can be made up of several neighborhoods, or “nodes”, that are all comprehensively planned out.

Chicago is a great example of this: a large city with many pedestrian-based neighborhoods with large reliance on public transportation. You can go to most everywhere in Chicago via public transportation. Today’s continued success of the original Chicago urban plan is a testament to the logic of pedestrian-based planning.

Automobile-based city planning is based on the principle that since we have cars, and people enjoy having cars, we should create cities that utilize them. In area with this sort of planning, there are strict single-use zoning requirements, which stemmed from an overreaction from wanting residential uses separated from industrial uses. While this is a worthy goal, we are not in the Industrial Revolution anymore.

This creates distance from residential areas of the city to the commercial areas of the city. Distance mandates the use of a car, and with more cars comes more congestion. The solution to this problem, unfortunately, is to add more highways. Many cities, including Boston and Milwaukee, are bucking this false solution to traffic congestion by actually tearing down highways.

Along with the single-use zoning requirements, there are also strict parking requirements for commercial uses. This stems from the planning put forth is designed for the car, not the human. Because of these requirements, land gets eaten up with no reasonable means to control it. Because this type of planning is not “node-based”, with no defined edge, nature is disregarded.

What this planning says is that everyone has a right to a car, which is the prevailing thought of everyone who HAS a car. Everyone is affected by city planning, but not everyone can afford to buy a car. This creates a situation where the “have-nots” are given a further disadvantage. We were given feet at birth, but not everyone is given a car on their sixteenth birthday.