Gross Density and New Urbanism: Comparing Conventional and New Urbanist Suburbs in Markham, Ontario

Abstract This article compares the gross density of new suburban secondary plans with conventional suburban development in Markham, Ontario. The new plans accommodate 150,000 people and are North America's largest concentration of new communities planned with traditional neighbourhood design principles. The comparison demonstrates that the mean gross residential density of the New Urbanism areas (7.9 upa or 19.5 uph) is approximately 76% higher than that of the adjacent conventional suburban areas. The population density differential between New Urbanist and conventional suburban areas is approximately 66%. It appears that New Urbanism can accommodate high gross densities and consume less land in greenfield extensions of an urban growth boundary.

[1]  R Sharpe,et al.  Urban land use planning , 1988 .

[2]  Dazhong Wen.  Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions , 1997 .

[3]  P. Calthorpe.  The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream , 1993 .

[4]  P. Gordon,et al.  Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal , 1997 .

[5]  I. Audirac,et al.  Urban form and residential choice: preference for urban density in Florida , 1992 .

[6]  J. Farris,et al.  The barriers to using urban infill development to achieve smart growth , 2001 .

[7]  B. Pushkarev,et al.  Public Transportation and Land Use Policy , 1977 .

[8]  Michael Pyatok.  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 , 2000 .

[9]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis , 2001 .

[10]  Jerry J. Salama,et al.  The redevelopment of distressed public housing: Early results from HOPE VI projects in Atlanta, Chicago, and San Antonio , 1999 .

[11]  P. Berke,et al.  Greening Development to Protect Watersheds: Is New Urbanism the Answer? , 2002 .

[12]  Ernest R. Alexander,et al.  Density Measures and Their Relation to Urban Form , 1988 .

[13]  J. Levine.  Rethinking Accessibility and Jobs-Housing Balance , 1998 .

[14]  Marlon G. Boarnet,et al.  Travel by design : the influence of urban form on travel , 2001 .

[15]  Ronaldo Balassiano,et al.  The transit metropolis: a global inquiry , 2001 .

[16]  Pierre Filion,et al.  Balancing Concentration and Dispersion? Public Policy and Urban Structure in Toronto , 2000 .

[17]  R. Ewing.  Is Los Angeles-Style Sprawl Desirable? , 1997 .

[18]  A. Duany,et al.  Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream , 2000 .

[19]  L. Sandercock,et al.  Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities , 1997 .

[20]  P. Berke,et al.  Greening Development to Protect Watersheds: Does New Urbanism Make a Difference? , 2003 .

[21]  J. Cullingworth.  The Political Culture of Planning: American Land Use Planning in Comparative Perspective , 1993 .

[22]  L. Bourne.  The urban sprawl debate: Myths, realities and hidden agendas , 2001 .

[23]  R. Cervero,et al.  TRAVEL DEMAND AND THE 3DS: DENSITY, DIVERSITY, AND DESIGN , 1997 .

[24]  Joseph Gyourko,et al.  Financing New Urbanism projects: Obstacles and solutions , 2000 .

[25]  Hok Lin Leung.  Land Use Planning Made Plain , 1990 .

[26]  Ute Lehrer,et al.  New (Sub)Urbanism: Countersprawl or repackaging the product∗ , 1996 .

[27]  L. Frank.  An analysis of relationships between urban form (density, mix, and jobs: housing balance) and travel behavior (mode choice, trip generation, trip length, and travel time) , 1994 .

[28]  R. Cervero,et al.  AN EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN TRANSIT AND URBAN FORM , 1995 .

[29]  Charles C. Bohl.  New urbanism and the city: Potential applications and implications for distressed inner‐city neighborhoods , 2000 .

[30]  C. E. Beaumont.  Historic Neighborhood Schools in the Age of Sprawl: Why Johnny Can't Walk to School. , 2000 .

[31]  D. Myers,et al.  Current preferences and future demand for denser residential environments , 2001 .

[32]  David L. A. Gordon,et al.  Large-scale Traditional Neighbourhood Development and Pre-emptive Ecosystem Planning: The Markham Experience, 1989-2001 , 2002 .