CNU board considers amending Charter

Document of core principles may expand to cover New Urbanism’s relationship to the environment and the Transect The Charter of the New Urbanism is CNU’s proudest single achievement. Ratified at CNU IV in Charleston in 1996, the charter exposes the problems associated with America’s formless growth and asserts bedrock principles for creating better neighborhoods, cities and towns. Eloquent and concise, it has provided unfailing guidance to new urbanists since its inception. In eight years, it has not required a change or addition. Until now. At its February meeting in Chicago, CNU’s board voted to reexamine the Charter in light of advances in theory and practice, as well as challenges that have emerged over the past eight years. The board formed a Charter Amendment Committee to bring the issue to members for consideration at the June Congress. “The charter is at the core of New Urbanism,” said CNU President John Norquist. “The board recognized its strength as a guiding document, but they also acknowledged that CNU isn’t dealing with a static world. By responding to new theories and challenges that are close to the center of what we do, we’ll be positioned for greater success.” Board members do not recommend revising the document itself. What the charter says, it says well. But as a nearly decade-old document, it may need supplementing. In 1994, for instance, the drafters of the charter had no way of anticipating the emergence of the Transect as a system for describing and organizing urbanism across a spectrum of settings ranging from rural preserves to major city centers. The urban Transect had not yet been conceived. Similarly, since the charter’s authors concluded their original work, environmental laws and green building ratings have become more powerful forces — good and bad — in shaping development. Indeed, it was a set of discussions on these very topics that gave rise to the idea of reexamining the charter. The first concerned a proposed joint venture between CNU, the United States Green Building Council and the Natural Resources Defense Council to certify neighborhoods, creating ratings that would serve as counterparts to the USGBA’s popular LEED green building ratings. A presentation by Chicago architect Doug Farr, who serves as CNU’s key representative on the proposed joint venture, described how LEED has gained influence among building owners, sending the USGBC’s budget from $400,000 to $14 million in just a few years. In theory, New Urbanism and the green building movement are highly compatible. And in practice, CNU members such as Farr, Elizabeth Moule and Stefanos Polyzoides have designed urban buildings that have garnered excellent LEED ratings. But the highly mathematical LEED system is also criticized for allowing consideration of a building’s context to be shortchanged, opening the door for buildings in sprawl settings to gain distinction as green buildings, even though they contribute to a pattern of automobile dependency, accelerated loss of natural habitats and other environmental problems. giving the green light In considering the joint venture, members of the board weighed the need to fix shortcomings in the LEED system against the risk of having CNU’s goals subsumed in LEED’s mathematical system, despite the best efforts of participants. In the end, the board gave Farr the green light to continue, but came to an agreement that since the charter mentions New Urbanism’s environmental benefits only intermittently, CNU would benefit by deliberately laying out the ideal relationship between urbanism and the environment. The following day, a presentation by Andres Duany on the Transect brought interest in amending the charter to a head. The Transect is a system for ordering the complex components of urbanism and environmentalism in a straightforward framework. A gradient describes how a region’s settings extend from rural wilderness to dense urban cores. The sections of the spectrum are designated T1 through T6, but gradations between and within zones and local variations are infinite. More detailed specifications can define the characteristics of buildings and spaces at these smaller scales. While holding off on formally endorsing the Transect, members greeted it enthusiastically, citing its potential to help community leaders and their constituents understand the planning choices they face. It might help environmentalists see that well-functioning regions include distinct natural and urban spaces — not ill-conceived blends of the two with features such as as urban detention ponds. Or by showing the natural place of lower-intensity mixed-use communities in a region, the Transect could help residents in outlying areas overcome the fear of a new urbanist plan for their community. “I think of the innumerable battles we lose in the field where this set of ideas could help us,” said architect Ray Gindroz. “It’s powerful. It provides a framework for discussion.” Board member Peter Calthorpe raised a final issue — that the charter and the Transect both concentrate on questions of form more than use, providing less guidance on principles such as the necessary allocation of employment areas. He challenged the board to reach a clearer position on these issues, and board members agreed that a charter amendment committee would be the vehicle for addressing them, as well as the role of the Transect and environmental principles in the future of New Urbanism. The work of the charter committee will be brought before the CNU membership at CNU XII in Chicago. “These charter amendments can both advance the practice of the New Urbanism and directly engage our growing membership,” said board chair Hank Dittmar. “The last Congress ended on a high note with John Norquist’s appointment as president, and this initiative offers us the chance to take CNU to the next level.”