[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SG-W:/ AANews article favorable to Newmarket development

Jeffrey makes an excellent point about the differences between Kentlands
and NewMarket.  

Kentlands serves as an infill alternative to sprawl, just
like some of the new developments in downtown Ann Arbor.  By themselves,
these projects really only have an indirect impact on sprawl by providing
growth alternatives to "growth-as-usual" in surrounding areas.  You see a
more direct impact in the "built environment" of the immediate area when
these developments incorporate pedestrian-friendly amenities, parks, etc.

Projects like NewMarket are SUPPOSED to attack sprawl much more directly.
The power of "New Urbanism" in rural and suburban locations is not so much
in how the project "looks" but in how it protects the surrounding
community from sprawl.  If a proposal like NewMarket fails to preserve
surrounding areas from development then it has to be judged a failure, no
matter how much better looking it is than traditional suburban
development.  New Urbanism without preservation is just better-looking
sprawl where a project like NewMarket is unique only in comparison
to the conventional subdivisions that would eventually surround it. 

I've read that the new New Urbanism development in Canton at Cherry Hill
Village incorporates Transfer of Development Rights from the surrounding
agricultural properties to provide increased density in the village.  If
this is the case, this would be an excellent model for advocates of New
Urbanism in rural/suburban locations.  Even better, the Cherry Hill
development builds upon an existing village pattern, hopefully enhancing
that area.

Andrew Mutch

smartgrowth-washtenaw:  Internet List and Forum for issues relating to
sprawl, smart growth, and preservation of the quality of life in Washtenaw

Postings to:  smartgrowth-washtenaw@great-lakes.net      For info, send
email to majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info