New Urbanism and the challenges of designing for diversity

Journal of Planning Education and Research

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 83-95

  Day, Kristen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Community; Costa Mesa; Diverse neighborhoods; Diversity; New Urbanism; Westside

Indexed keywords

NEIGHBORHOOD; URBAN DESIGN; URBAN PLANNING;

CALIFORNIA; COSTA MESA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 24744458518     PISSN: 0739456X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X03255424     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Adams, Andrew, Colin Drukker, Doug Feremenga, Anna Harris, Yusake Inoue, Ian O'Brian-Jones, Elizabeth Kim, Beverly Mathias, Krista Parsely, Gena Pasillas, Vivian Romero, and Brett Schneider. 1999. An examination of the draft specific plan of the Westside of Costa Mesa and an alternative charrette. Student report, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine.
2. Aguilar, Ismael, Hun-Kyun Bae, Dina Giannikopoulos, Anna Ku, and Jason Wasmund. 2002. Hedonic estimation of the effects of odor pollution on property values in the Westside of Costa Mesa, California. Unpublished student report, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine.
3. Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. American Institute of Planners Journal 35: 216 - 224.
4. Bohl, Charles C. 2000. New Urbanism and the city: Potential applications and implications for distressed inner-city neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate 11 (4): 761 - 801.
5. Bollens, Scott. 2000. On narrow ground: Urban policy and ethnic conflict in Jerusalem and Belfast. Albany: State University of New York Press.
6. Calthorpe, Peter. 1993. The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
7. Christoforidis, Alexander. 1996. Neotraditional developments: The New Urbanism. Chicago: Council of Planning Librarians.
8. Congress for the New Urbanism. 2000. Charter of the New Urbanism. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9. Congress for the New Urbanism. 2002. CNU. Congress for the New Urbanism. Accessed 8 August 2002 from www.cnu.org
10. Congress for the New Urbanism and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2000. Principles for inner city neighborhood design: Creating communities of opportunity. Accessed 13 July 2002 from http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/principle.html
11. Costa Mesa Municipal Code. 2002. Sec. 13-42. Residential common interest development conversions. City of Costa Mesa, California.
12. Davis, Mike. 2000. Magical urbanism: Latinos reinvent the US city. London: Verso.
13. Day, Kristen. 1999. Embassies and sanctuaries: Race and women's fear and welcome in privatized public space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 17 (3): 307 - 328.
14. De Arakal, Byron. 2001. Westside can leverage clout by playing smart politics. The Daily Pilot, 16 May.
15. Duany, Andres, and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. 1994. The neighborhood, the district, and the corridor. In The New Urbanism: Toward an architecture of community, edited by P. Katz. New York: McGraw-Hill.
16. EIP Associates. 1999. Costa Mesa Westside Specific Plan. Technical background report, Costa Mesa, CA.
17. EIP Associates. 2000. Westside Specific Plan. Costa Mesa, CA.
18. Eppli, Mark J., and Charles C. Tu. 1999. Valuing the New Urbanism: The impact of the New Urbanism on prices of single-family homes. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
19. Fields, Robin, and Ray Herndon. 2001. Segregation of a new sort takes shape. Los Angeles Times, 5 July, A1.
20. Franck, Karen A., and Lynn Paxson. 1989. Women and urban public space. In Public places and spaces, edited by I. Altman and E. Zube. New York: Plenum.
21. Frankenberg, Ruth. 1993. White women, race matters: The social construction of race. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
22. Fung, Archon. 2001. Beyond and below the New Urbanism: Citizen participation and responsive spatial reconstruction. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 28 (4): 615 - 638.
23. Gilkes, Cheryl Townsend. 1988. Building in many places: Multiple commitments and ideologies in black women's community work. In Women and the politics of empowerment, edited by A. Bookman and S. Morgen. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
24. Green, J. W., and J. W. Leigh. 1989. Teaching ethnographic methods to social service workers. Practicing Anthropology 11 (3): 8 - 9.
25. Harvey, David. 1997. The New Urbanism and the communitarian trap. Harvard Design Magazine, Winter/Spring, 1 - 3.
26. Hayden, Dolores. 1995. The power of place. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Hong, Peter. 2002. L.A. is least diverse area in state, study finds. Los Angeles Times, 6 August, B1.
28. Katz, Peter. 1994. The New Urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill.
29. Kho, Jennifer. 2001a. The Westside story: A diverse group of residents is struggling to help this complex part of Costa Mesa break with its troubled past and move into a promising future. The Daily Pilot, 3 May, A1, A10.
30. Kho, Jennifer. 2001b. The crusaders: While there are individuals striving to improve Costa Mesa's Westside, some spend a lot more time at it than others. The Daily Pilot, 10 May, A1, A10.
31. Kho, Jennifer. 2001c. The way it was: Costa Mesa's Westside has quite the history, including the county's first tract housing. The Daily Pilot, 17 May, A1, A12.
32. Kho, Jennifer. 2001d. The vision: What is the future of the Westside? Only a time traveler knows for sure. The Daily Pilot, 24 May, A1, A8.
33. Kotkin, Joel. 1999. The future of the center: The core city in the new economy. Policy study no. 264. Los Angeles: Reason Public Policy Institute and Pepperdine University Institute for Public Policy.
34. Kunstler, James Howard. 1993. The geography of now Here. New York: Simon & Schuster.
35. Latino Community Advisors. 2000. Recommendations for the Westside Specific Plan. Report, 3 January, Costa Mesa, CA.
36. Lee, Robert G. 1972. The social definition of outdoor recreational places. In Social behavior, natural resources, and the environment, edited by W. R. Burch Jr., N. H. Cheek Jr., and L. Taylor, 68 - 84. New York: Harper & Row.
37. Lewis Mumford Center. 2001. Ethnic diversity grows, neighborhood integration is at a standstill. Accessed 18 August 2002 at www.albany.edu/mumford/census
38. Moore, Solomon, and Robin Fields. 2002. The great "white" influx. Los Angeles Times, 31 July, A1
39. Moudon, Anne Vernez. 2000. Proof of goodness: A substantive basis for New Urbanism? Places 13 (1): 38 - 43.
40. Nelessen, Anton Clarence. 1993. Visions for a new American Dream. Chicago: American Planning Association/Planners Press. Nyden, Phillip, John Lukehart, Michael T. Maly, and William
41. Perman. 1999. Neighborhood racial and ethnic diversity in US cities. Cityscape 4 (2): 1 - 17.
42. Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. 1994. Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York: Routledge Kegan Paul.
43. Palen, J. John. 1988. Gentrification, revitalization and displacement. In Handbook of housing and the built environment, edited by E. Huttman and W. van Vliet. New York: Greenwood.
44. Peterson, C. R. 2000. Readers respond-Westside story still untold. The Daily Pilot, 18 November.
45. Poticha, Shelley R. 2000. Comment on Charles C. Bohl's"New Urbanism and the city: Potential applications and implications for distressed inner-city neighborhoods." Housing Policy Debate 11 (4): 815 - 819.
46. Public policy: Al Gore. 1998. New Urban News 3 (6).
47. Pyatok, Michael. 2000a. Comment on Charles C. Bohl's "New Urbanism and the city: Potential applications and implications for distressed inner-city neighborhoods" - The politics of design: The New Urbanists vs. the grass roots. Housing Policy Debate 11 (4): 803 - 814.
48. Pyatok, Michael. 2000b. Martha Stewart vs. Studs Terkel? New Urbanism and inner city neighborhoods that work. Places 13 (1): 40 - 43.
49. Qadeer, Mohammad A. 1997. Pluralistic planning for multicultural cities: The Canadian practice. Journal of the American Planning Association 63 (4): 481 - 495.
50. Ralph and Goldy Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies. 2001a. Census 2000 fact sheet: Non-Hispanic white exposure to minorities, by state. University of California, Los Angeles. Accessed 18 August 2002 at http://www.sppsr.ucla.edu/lewis
51. Ralph and Goldy Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies. 2001b. Census 2000 fact sheet: Racial isolation. University of California, Los Angeles. Accessed 18 August 2002 at http://www.sppsr.ucla.edu/lewis
52. Ruddick, Susan. 1996. Constructing difference in public spaces: Race, class, and gender as interlocking systems. Urban Geography 17 (2): 132 - 151.
53. Saltman, Juliet. 1991. Maintaining racially diverse neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Quarterly 26 (3): 416 - 441.
54. Sanchez, George J. 1993. Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, culture, and identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945. New York: Oxford University Press.
55. Shibley, Robert G. 1998. The complete New Urbanism and the partial practices of placemaking. Utopian Studies 9 (1): 80 - 103.
56. Steutville, Robert, ed. 2001. New Urbanism: Comprehensive report and best practices guide. 2d ed. Ithaca, NY: New Urban Publications.
57. Talen, Emily. 2001. Charter of the New Urbanism and valuing the New Urbanism: The impact of the New Urbanism on prices of single-family homes [Review]. Journal of the American Planning Association 67 (1).
58. Thigpen, David E. 2002. The long way home. Time: 161: 42 - 44.
59. Tu, Charles C., and Mark J. Eppli. 1999. Valuing New Urbanism: The case of Kentlands. Real Estate Economics 27 (3).
60. Tu, Charles C., and Mark J. Eppli. 2002. Year 2000 and 1990 census data. Accessed 13 July and 6 August 2002 at http://factfinder.census.gov/
61. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1996a. Principles for designing and planning homeownership zones. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
62. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1996b. New American neighborhoods: Building homeownership zones to revitalize our nation's communities. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
63. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2002. Housing and communities: About HOPE VI. Accessed 1 August 2002 at http://www.hud.gov/ offices/pih/programs/ph/hope6/
64. Wall, Linda. 1999. Place to interface: Developing a sense of community through on-line technology. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Irvine.
65. Wallace, Marcia, and Beth Moore Milroy. 1999. Intersecting claims: Possibilities for planning in Canada's multicultural cities. In Gender, planning and human rights, edited by T. Fenster. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
66. Walzer, Michael. 1986. Pleasures and costs of urbanity. Dissent 33: 470 - 475.
67. Weiss, Marc A. 2000. Within neighborhoods, a broad range of housing types and price levels can bring people of diverse ages, races and incomes into daily interaction, strengthening the personal and civic bonds essential to an authentic community. In Charter of New Urbanism, edited by the Congress of the New Urbanism. New York: McGraw-Hill.
68. Westside Improvement Association. 2000. A new vision for the Westside. Costa Mesa, CA: Westside Improvement Association.
69. Williamson, K. Marie. 2002. Planning for the public side of mixed-use developments. Unpublished dissertation proposal, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine.
70. Yoshino, Kimi. 2002. Mexican supermarket meets obstacles in Anaheim. Los Angeles Times, 5 August, B1.
71. Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.