William H. Hudnut III
Urban Land Institute/Joseph C. Canizaro Chair for Public Policy

Expert Opinion: New Suburbanism

More compact development; higher densities; a wider range of housing options including multifamily, lofts, condominiums, and live/work places; decreased car dependence; walkability; green space; town centers; mixed uses; a strong sense of community—it’s all part of the “new suburbanism,” i.e., smart growth in the suburbs that overcomes placelessness and provides an antidote to sprawl.

However, while one-third of Americans want to live in places that embody these design principles, according to a 2001 publication of the National Governors Association, “less than 1 percent of housing” offers such places. Replacing unplanned lower-density development farther and farther out on the periphery with the concomitant unintended consequences of that process—traffic congestion, air pollution, new infrastructure costs, environmental damage—with a commitment to the concepts outlined by Colin Drukker (see “The New Suburbanism: Communities in Profile,” page 38) will lead to a better and higher quality of community life.

The pitfalls of new suburbanism are similar to those of its progenitor, new urbanism. Its design can appear too formulaic. It can come across as window-dressing. It can be a half measure, because it is easier to change the look of a suburb than to grapple with the difficult public policy issues like highway building and low-density zoning that cause sprawl in the first place. Nonetheless, the value of new suburbanism lies in the way it is helping change the dialogue about how we plan our cities and our traditional and outmoded concepts about suburbia.