This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Skaburskis, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

New Urbanism and Sprawl

A Toronto Case Study

Queen's University in Canada

This article presents an approach that has not been previously used for assessing claims regarding a development's impact on urban form and sprawl. The analysis shows that the Cornell new urbanist development increases suburban densities but not by nearly as much as would be inferred by analysis that simply compares the density of the development with that of the surrounding conventional suburbs. Most households living in the higher-density building types plan to eventually move to detached houses. If new urbanism, as it is expressed in the planning and design of Cornell, is to be a generalizable substitute to conventional suburban development, its projects will have to have a much larger proportion of single-family detached houses than the Cornell's 37 percent. New urbanists may best help reduce city spread by inducing households to move to and then to stay in single-family detached houses on smaller lots.

Key Words: new urbanism • sprawl • demand assessment • analytic methods

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?