Applying the New Urbanism Theory in Urban Planning: Proponents and Opponents

Over the past few decades, the new urbanism has emerged as a controversial alternative against traditional and conventional patterns of urban development. As a pioneering movement, it was developed in response to the failure of cities and suburbs in the mid-twentieth century. The new urbanists, like the advocates of garden cities and before them the modernists, began their work with great hopes to meet the needs of marginalized groups and restore the beauty and character of the cities. In this regard, this study seeks to answer these questions: To what extent has new urbanism been able to lead to planning a good community? How is new urbanism developing its own theory and how does it help us understand this theory? By means of content analysis, various ideas and views about new urbanism and its formation from theory to practice have been reviewed and criticized and finally, the advantages and disadvantages of its implementation in Iran are discussed. The results of the study reveal that although the new urbanists envisioned cities without suburbs, but in practice they have not yet been able to properly apply the values that this normative theory adheres to in order to make good communities. Their critics express that new urbanists ultimately serve the interests of the development process instead of rescuing the cities and the choices suggested by new urbanist forms mainly favor the production and sustainability of economic activities in the sale market rather than being in line with peoples’ preferences. The new urbanist designers support a variety of forms in order to respect urban diversity but do not tolerate opposing views about the shape and character of urban environments. The new urbanist approach considers the democratic participation in contrast with the expert decisions made by qualified designers who know the formal principles of a good community. In their view, democracy can downgrade the quality of urban planning.