City365_0_Syllabus_v2_140409

Cities 365: Techniques of the City - New Urbanism and Its Discontents
Bryn Mawr College, Spring 2014 Prof. Jennifer Hurley
Classes: Fridays 12:10 – 2 pm, Thomas 102 jhurley@brynmawr.edu
Office Hours: F 11 am – 12 noon, 2:10 – 3 pm, and by appointment, Thomas 218
Course Overview
This course will examine the theory and practice of New Urbanism, particularly in the context of North
American planning and real estate development. We will consider:
• the history and growth of the new urbanist movement;
• significant new urbanist practitioners, plans, and development projects across the full range of new
urbanist practice, including rural-urban; greenfield, infill, and redevelopment; and modernist and
traditional architecture;
• critiques of new urbanism; and
• current trajectories of new urbanist work.
I am a practicing planner. Although I maintain a strong interest in academic research and analysis, that is not
what I do for my “day job”. Therefore, the reading for the class will include a mix of academic research
writing as well as books and articles written for practicing professionals and the general public, such as “how-
to” manuals and polemical works.
Although some of you may decide to enter the field of planning, many of you will follow other paths. In
addition to teaching knowledge of the content, the primary purpose of this course is to teach skills that can
be applied in many different fields. There will be an emphasis on writing, critical thinking and analysis, and
presentation and discussion skills.
One of my professional specializations is facilitating public involvement in planning and development issues.
In addition to more standard lectures and discussion formats, I will use some of the techniques from public
involvement to generate class participation. By modeling these techniques in class, I hope that you can learn
to apply them in other areas.
The class will be discussion-based with occasional lectures, selected guest speakers, and the option of a tour
of Kentlands with the Kentlands town architect or an urban design tour of Center City. Assignments will be
structured around a case study of a built new urbanist project and will include class presentation as well as
writing.

of 5
City 360: New Urbanism and Its Discontents
Spring 2014, Fridays 12 – 2pm
Bryn Mawr College
Assignments Updated 1/23/14
General Explanation and Direction
There are essentially two assignments for this course: (1) class participation and (2) a case study of a
development controversy.
1. Class Participation
What you get out of this class largely depends on what you put into it. Although there will be
occasional lectures, the emphasis in the class will be on reading and discussion. In order to
accommodate various personalities and learning styles, I will offer a variety of ways for people to
participate in class discussion. Nonetheless, participation is paramount! If I do not think that
people are completing the required readings adequately, I will add one or more exams into the
course schedule.
2. New Urbanist Project Case Study
For your final paper, you will write a case study of a built new urbanist project. The Case Study is a
key element of the learning for the class. By identifying and assessing a project that is place-specific,
students apply learning from the class to “real life” situations. Each student will explore one case in-
depth. In addition, there will be two points where students will present information about their cases
to the entire class so that the class has a body of cases to compare to each other.
In order to help you structure this assignment, I have broken the case study into four pieces:
1. Presentation #1: Introductory Description of Case
2. Paper #1: Topic Review
3. Presentation #2: Project Evaluation
4. New Urbanist Project Case Study, Final Paper
Directions for Each Assignment
1. Presentation #1: Introductory Description of Case
a. The goal of this presentation is to present enough information about your case study
that students will be able to use all of the cases as examples for class discussion
throughout the semester.
b. This presentation will be a “pecha kucha” style presentation: you will be limited to
20 slides and 6 minutes. Each slide should have at least one image and no text
except for titles and labels.
c. You must include a locator map. Aerial photos are available for most places on
Google maps.

of 5
d. As part of your presentation, identify the topic that you think is particularly relevant to
your case study and that you plan to use for the first paper assignment (see below).
e. Try to answer the following questions about your case, to the extent that information
is available:
i. Location, with enough information so that people could find the project
ii. History: date of plan, dates of construction, current status
iii. Site information: # acres, wetlands, slopes, soil, access, etc.
iv. Program: # residential units, residential types, commercial square footage,
civic space, etc.
v. Target market, pricing
vi. Team: Developer, Designers, Planner, Architect, Landscape Architect, Civil
Engineers, Public Officials
vii. What were the precedents for this project?
viii. What’s unique about this project? What new ground did this project break?
ix. What is the relationship of this project to the region?
x. What is the relationship of this project to nearby neighborhoods and districts?
xi. What is the range of housing size and affordability?
xii. What was the development approval process? What kind of zoning and
subdivision regulations were in place? What were the key challenges in the
development approval process?
f. Use aerial photographs, maps, site plans, renderings, and other photographs to
convey a sense of the project.
g. All images must include a source reference.
2. Paper #1: Topic Paper
Select a topic that is particularly relevant to your case study and conduct a mini-literature
review of that topic. These papers should incorporate a minimum of 5 references that are
full-length articles published in scholarly journals. The point of the paper is to pick a topic or
debate to explore in more depth, and present the evidence that either 1) supports a
particular argument; or 2) contrasts two competing points of view. Your literature review
paper should show that you’ve read and fully absorbed the readings, and that you’ve
understood the main arguments. Start by addressing: What is the main theoretical or
empirical argument? Are there competing explanations being refuted? What empirical
evidence is given to support an argument? What is the theoretical/analytical reasoning being
used?
Length: As long as it takes to make your argument and no longer (probably 6-8 pgs).
3. Presentation #2: Case Study Evaluation
a. The goal of this presentation is to present your evaluation of the successes and
failures of your case study.
b. You will have 15 minutes to make your presentation, with class discussion to follow.
c. Try to answer the following questions about your case:
i. How does this case study relate to the principles embodied in the Charter for
the New Urbanism?

of 5
ii. How does this project use or contribute to new urbanist concepts and
standards related to transportation, equity & affordability, and environmental
issues?
iii. How does this project use or contribute to the topic you selected for your
topic paper?
iv. In what ways does this project excel?
v. In what ways does this project fall short?
d. Your presentation should include ample aerial photographs, maps, site plans,
renderings, and other photographs to illustrate your points.
e. All images must include a source reference.
f.
4. Case Study Final Paper
a. Length: As long as it takes to present a complete case study and no longer (probably
25-35 pgs with ample illustrations).
b. For your final paper, you will submit a complete case study (description and analysis)
of your chosen new urbanist project and topic. Your final paper will build on the
previous presentations and paper, but should reflect improvement from those
submissions (i.e. if you do not take my comments on your draft installments into
account or if your final paper does not reflect any additional thinking on your part,
your grade on the final paper will suffer).
c. In addition to the previous elements, your final paper should include an urban design
analysis. Drawing on the urban design features in the various readings and in our class
discussions, analyze the urban design of your project. This analysis should primarily
be presented as a series of illustrations with detailed captions. The illustrations can
be photographs, hand drawings, or computer drawings. The artistic quality is not
important. The only thing that is important about the illustrations is their ability to
convey the information you are trying to convey. Key questions to answer include:
i. What were the existing physical conditions on the site prior to the project?
ii. What did the project change?
iii. Did the change make the place more auto- or pedestrian-oriented?
iv. How did the change affect traffic patterns?
v. How did the change affect surrounding neighbors?
d. Your final paper should include description of the case, exploration of your selected
topic, urban design analysis, and your own evaluation of the project.
e. This is your opportunity to demonstrate that you have completed the reading and
that you understand and can apply the concepts discussed in the reading and in class.
f. The final paper should read as one complete work, not as unrelated or disconnected
sections. The structure and presentation of the final paper is up to you. The best
papers will probably not follow the exact outline of the three installments, but will
incorporate all of those pieces into a coherent whole.

of 5
Grading
Assignments will be evaluated on the following items:
• Synthesis of Topic & Application of Concepts: clear understanding of the key issues related to
the topic chosen and demonstrated understanding and application of concepts from class and
readings
• Articulation of Topic:
o For Presentations: the degree to which your lecture, powerpoint, handouts, or other
materials convey the key issues related to the topic chosen – this includes the visual
quality of your materials
o For Papers: clarity of writing, correct grammar, elegance, overall structure of paper
• Sources: full information available in bibliography and/or citations; all information that is not
known to the general public is cited or footnoted; sources reflect the diversity of the points of
view related to the topic; use of class readings; use of readings from outside of class
VERY IMPORTANT
• All papers must have a point to make. Do NOT ramble for required page length and expect
a decent grade.
• All papers must have a structure, with a beginning (introduction), a middle (the “story” or
evidence), and an end (the conclusion).
• All papers must demonstrate correct grammar and the ability to communicate clearly.
Elegant writing wins extra points.
• All papers require complete citations for all of your sources!
Ways to Improve Your Writing
• Write an outline before you start writing the paper.
• Proof your work.
• Finish your paper a few days early and set it aside. Re-read and edit before turning in.
• Read your paper backwards. It is easy to miss mistakes when reading your paper, because your
brain already knows what it should say. Reading the sentences backwards (start with the last
sentence, then the next-to-last sentence, etc.) can work around this skill your brain has.
• Swap papers with another student in the class or ask one of your friends to read and comment on
your paper.
• Use the resources of the Writing Center: http://www.brynmawr.edu/deans/writing_center.shtml.
Grades will be calculated with the following weights:
• Class Participation & Discussion [20%]—I expect you to complete all of the required reading, to
attend class, and to participate actively in classroom discussions and activities. You can improve
your class participation grade by:
o Attending class.
o Participating in discussions.
o Raising questions and making comments that demonstrate your engagement with
the reading material.

of 5
o Raising questions and making comments that demonstrate your engagement with
your topic.
o Volunteering when I ask for volunteers.
o Bringing outside resources to the attention of the class by emailing Jennifer.
o Emailing Jennifer with questions or comments about the reading before class.
o Other ideas?—Let Jennifer know.
• Presentation #1 [10%]
• Topic Paper [20%]
• Presentation #2 [20%]
• Final Paper [30%]— Your final paper will build on the draft installments, but should reflect
improvement from those submissions (i.e. if you do not take my comments on your draft
installments into account or if your final paper does not reflect any additional thinking on your
part, your grade on the final paper will suffer).

of 5

Cities
365:
New
Urbanism
and
Its
Discontents
Updated
1/20/09

Spring
2014,
Fridays
12
–
2
pm,
Thomas
102
Prof.
Jennifer
Hurley

Bryn
Mawr
College
Office
Hours:
F
11
am
–
12
noon,
2
–
3
pm,
and
by
appointment,
Thomas
218

Course
Schedule
jhurley@brynmawr.edu

Updated
2/27/14

All
readings
are
available
on
Moodle
except
the
following
books
which
will
be
available
for
purchase
at
the
BMC
bookstore
and
on
reserve
at
Carpenter:

Duany,
Andrés,
Elizabeth
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Jeff
Speck.
2000.
Suburban
Nation:
The
Rise
of
Sprawl
and
the
Decline
of
the
American
Dream.
New

York:
North
Point
Press,
a
Division
of
Farrar,
Straus
and
Giroux,
2000.

Congress
for
the
New
Urbanism
and
Emily
Talen,
Editor.
2013.
Charter
of
the
New
Urbanism,
Second
Edition.
New
York:
McGraw-‐Hill
Education.

Note:
Readings
are
listed
in
the
recommended
reading
order.
Readings
highlighted
with
an
asterisk
are
especially
important.

Date
Topic
Required
Readings
Pgs
Class
Activities
Assignments

1/24
1. Intro
Class

World
Café

Dialogues

Introductions

Class
Overview

Visual
Preference

Survey

1/31
2. The
context
for
New

Urbanism:

Antecedents
of
Sprawl

1) Experiencing
Place:
Stilgoe
1998,
pp.
1-‐19

2) Sprawl
and
New
Urbanism:
Dutton
2000,
11-‐27

3) Sprawl,
New
Urbanism,
CNU
Charter:
Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000,

ix-‐37,
257-‐265*

4) Critiques
of
New
Urbanism:
Ellis
2002,
261-‐292*

5) VPS
Results:
Placemakers
2005
[SKIM]

120
Brainstorm
&

Group
Discussion:

Class
Groundrules

Lecture:
Forces

that
contributed
to

sprawl

Discussion:
Our

own
context
-‐

Where
we
come

from

of 5
Date
Topic
Required
Readings
Pgs
Class
Activities
Assignments

2/7
3. Modernism
vs

Traditional
Urbanism

6) Urbanism
vs
Anti-‐Urbanism:
Talen,
ch
3,
37-‐68*

7) Modernism,
Le
Corbusier,
the
Death
of
the
Street:
Holston
1989,
31-‐58,
101-‐
144*

8) CNU
Charter
of
the
New
Urbanism*

a. Optional:

b. Le
Corbusier
1987
[1929],
163-‐247,
277-‐289

c. Review
CNU
website:
http://www.cnu.org/

145
Lecture:

Modernism
&

Traditional

Urbanism

Discussion:
CNU

Charter

Results
of
VPS

2/14
4. Case
Introductions
d. Optional:

e. Duany,
1991
(watch
lecture
on
youtube,
parts
1-‐9
–
start
at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwd4Lq0Xvgc)

Student

Presentations

1.
Presentations:

Case

Descriptions
–

submit
PPT
by

noon
2/13
via

Moodle

2/21
5. Real
Estate

Development
System

&
Role
of
Planning

a. All
of
the
system

elements
that

influence
place

b. Process
of

development

approval

c. Efficiency,
Equity,

Tragedy
of
the

Commons

9) Rationales
for
Planning:
Brooks
2002,
50-‐60*

10) Tragedy
of
the
Commons:
Hardin
1968
pp
1-‐11*

11) Planning
Process:
Ford
1990,
1-‐52*

12) On
Developers:
Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000.
Ch
6,
pp.
99-‐114

13) Codes:
Dutton
2000,
69-‐85

a. Optional:

b. Weiss
1987,
17-‐106
(on
real
estate
industry,
planning,
zoning)

c. Rybczynski
2007
(on
development
process)

100
Guest
Speaker:

Jason
Duckworth
-‐

confirmed

2/28
6. NU:
Region,
City

a. Greenfield
vs
Infill

b. Role
of
government

planning
vs
private

development

14) Regional
Planning:
Seltzer
and
Carbonell
2011,
1-‐16*

15) Planned
Communities
&
Regionalism:
Talen,
ch
6
&
7,
158
–
250*

16) Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000,
ch
8,
135-‐151.
Portion
of
Ch
10,
183-‐
187

17) Charter
Book:
Calthorpe,
17-‐22,
Yaro,
Benfield,
Arendt,
Grimshaw,
27-‐53,

Morris
57-‐61,
Bothwell
67-‐69,
Poticha
73-‐77,
Arrington
83-‐87,
Orfield,
Daigle

91-‐95*

a. Optional:

b. Review
Seven50
website:
http://seven50.org/*

c. Seven50
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySCHytba3So

180

of 5
Date
Topic
Required
Readings
Pgs
Class
Activities
Assignments

3/7
NO
CLASS
–
replaced
with

Tour
TBA

2.
Topic
Paper

Due
5
PM
–

submit
via

Moodle

3/14
SPRING
BREAK

3/21
7. NU:
Neighborhood,

Block,
Building

a. Neighborhood
Unit

b. Rural-‐Urban

Transect

18) Farr
2008
pp
125-‐131

19) Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000,
remainder
of
Ch
10,
187-‐214

20) Charter
Book:
Murrain,
62-‐64,
Barnett,
Sorlien,
Plater-‐Zyberk
99-‐104,
Kulash

117-‐121,
Volk
and
Zimmerman
125-‐129,
Norquist,
Dunham-‐Jones
and

Williamson,
Lieberman
137-‐149,
Moule,
Norris,
Lennerz
and
Ferrell
153-‐165,

Comitta
171-‐174,
Solomon,
Tachieva,
Polyzoides,
Thadani,
Gindroz,
Hiss,
Farr

181-‐207,
Dover
211-‐216,
Duany
Bess
Schimmenti
231-‐243,
Greenberg

Blackson
247-‐251

a. Optional:

b. Duany
and
Brain
2005,
141-‐166
(on
the
rural
to
urban
transect)

c. Scheer
2001,
1-‐17
(on
layers
of
urban
form)

d. Moughtin
2003,
Ch
8
“Visual
Analysis,”
pp.
209-‐232
(on
urban
form

analysis)

e. Whyte
1980,
10-‐101
(on
public
space)

f. Gehl
2006,
29-‐47
(on
retail
design)

g. Newman
1973,
1-‐101
(on
defensible
space)

h. Perry
1929,
54-‐65
(the
neighborhood
unit)

120
Guest
Speaker:

Dhiru
Thadani?

3/28
8. NU:
Equity
&

Affordability
/

Presentations

21) Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000,
ch
3,
39-‐57,
ch
7,
115-‐137

22) Charter
Book:
Talen,
Richmond,
78-‐81,
Longo,
Weiss,
Goffman
130-‐135

23) Talen
2008,
1-‐47,
109-‐192

120
Student

Presentations:

• East
Beach

• Newtown
St

Charles

• Glenwood
Park

• Del
Mar
Station

• Atlantic
Station

• Envision

Utah/Daybreak

3.
Case
Study

Evaluation

Presentations

3/29
9. Tour
of
Kentlands
24) Kentlands
Maps
&
Aeriels

25) Kentlands
News
Articles

26) Eppli
and
TU,
2997,
Valuing
the
New
Urbanism

27) Tu
and
Eppli,
2001,
Empirical
Examination
of
TND

REQ:
BY
3/27:

email
JH
with
1-‐3

questions
you

have
about

Kentlands

of 5
Date
Topic
Required
Readings
Pgs
Class
Activities
Assignments

4/4
10. NU:
Transportation
28) Duany,
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Speck,
2000,
ch
4
&
5,
59-‐97

29) Charter
Book:
Hall
88-‐89,
Moudon
122-‐123,
Aurbach
208-‐209,
Massengale

217-‐219,
Kelbaugh
221-‐227

30) Speck
2012,
1-‐72

a. Optional:

b. Jeff
Speck
TEDTalk
on
the
Walkable
City:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wai4ub90stQ

c. Moughtin
2003,
127-‐169
(on
streets
as
urban
design)

d. Appleyard
et
al
1972,
84-‐101
(on
livable
streets)

e. Baker
2006,
1-‐2
(on
behavioral
psychology
and
urban
design)

f. ITE
2010
Designing
Walkable
Urban
Thoroughfares

g. NACTO
Urban
Street
Design
Guide
website:
http://nacto.org/usdg/

125
Student

Presentations:

• Pleasant
Hill

• Bethesda
Row

• Kendall

• Columbia
Pike

Guest
Speaker:
Jeff

Speck
1-‐2pm
-‐

confirmed

3.
Case
Study

Evaluation

Presentations

REQ:
BY
4/3:

email
JH
with
1-‐3

questions
you

have
for
Jeff

Speck

4/11
11. NU:
Environmentalism

/
Presentations

31) Charter
Book:
Condon,
23-‐25,
Low
175-‐177,
Mouzon
244-‐245,
Krier
259-‐262

32) Farr
2008
pp
18-‐61

33) Kelbaugh
2013,
57-‐86

a. Optional:

b. Farr
lecture
on
Sustainable
Urbanism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSjurs4ZnlM&list=PLAC742F654
5800FEC&index=1

50
Guest
Speaker:

Patrick
Starr
-‐

confirmed

Student

Presentations:

• Serenbe

• Seaside

• Rosemary
Beach

• Alys
Beach

3.
Case
Study

Evaluation

Presentations

REQ:
BY
4/10:

email
JH
with
1-‐3

questions
you

have
for
Patrick

Starr

4/18
NO
CLASS
–
replaced
with

Tour
3/29

4/25
12. NU:
Practice

Innovations:
Charrette,

Form
Based
Codes,
&

Tactical
Urbanism

34) FBC,
Charrette:
Charter
Book:
Borys,
Hurley
166-‐169

35) Codes:
Dutton
2000,
69-‐85

36) Local
Government
Commission,
1-‐8

37) National
Charrette
Institute
website:
http://www.charretteinstitute.org/

38) Tactical
Urbanism,
vol
2

a. Optional:

b. Burdette
2004,
1-‐81

c. CNU20
Solomon
&
Duany
lectures
on
codes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6kO09bIq34&list=PLAC742F654
5800FEC&index=10

d. The
Codes
Project
website:
http://codesproject.asu.edu/

Note:
No
office

hours
before

class
–
JH

speaking
in
FOC

of 5
Date
Topic
Required
Readings
Pgs
Class
Activities
Assignments

5/2
13. Class
Wrap-‐Up
39) Future
of
NU:
Talen,
ch
9,
274
–
290

40) Accomplishments/Future
of
NU:
Charter
Book:
Barnett,
Duany
1-‐13,

Calthorpe
253-‐257,
Preston,
54-‐55,
Steuteville
114-‐115,
Lydon
150-‐151

35
Discussion:

Evaluation
of
New

Urbanism

Class
Evaluation

Forms

Ask
a
Planner
Q&A

4.
Final
Paper

Due
5
PM
–

submit
via

Moodle

of 9

Cities
365:
New
Urbanism
and
Its
Discontents

Spring
2014

Bryn
Mawr
College

Bibliography09

Required
and
Optional
Readings
are
available
on
the
class
Moodle
site
or
accessed
through
weblinks
provided.

Required
Readings

Brooks,
Michael
P.
2002.
Planning
Theory
for
Practitioners.
Chicago:
Planners
Press,
American
Planning

Association.

“Planning
is
Unconstitutional”
in
“Chapter
3:
Running
the
Gauntlet
of
Planning
Critics,”
pp

43-‐47
“Chapter
4:
Rationales
for
Public
Planning,”
pp
50-‐60,

“Chapter
6:
Centralized
Rationality:
The

Planner
as
Applied
Scientist,”
pp
81-‐95,
“Chapter
8:
Decentralized
Rationality:
The
Planner
as
Political

Activist,”
pp
107-‐117,
and
“Chapter
9:
Decentralized
Non-‐Rationality:
The
Planner
as
Communicator,”
pp

119-‐131.

Congress
for
the
New
Urbanism
and
Emily
Talen,
Editor.
2013.
Charter
of
the
New
Urbanism,
Second
Edition.

New
York:
McGraw-‐Hill
Education.

Duany,
Andrés,
Elizabeth
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Jeff
Speck.
2000.
Suburban
Nation:
The
Rise
of
Sprawl
and
the

Decline
of
the
American
Dream.
New
York:
North
Point
Press,
a
Division
of
Farrar,
Straus
and
Giroux,

2000.

Dutton,
John
A.
2000.
New
American
Urbanism:
Re-‐forming
the
Suburban
Metropolis.
Milano,
Italy:
Skira.

Introduction,
Chapter
1
-‐
Critique
and
Response,
Chapter
Four
–
Codes
and
Conventions.

Ellis,
Cliff.
2002.
The
New
Urbanism:
Critiques
and
Rebuttals.
Journal
of
Urban
Design,
vol
7,
no
3.
Pp
261-‐291.

Farr,
Doug.
2007.
Sustainable
Urbanism:
Urban
Design
with
Nature.
Wiley.

Ford,
Kristina,
James
Lopach,
and
Dennis
O’Donnell.
1990.
Planning
Small
Town
America:
Observations,
Sketches

and
a
Reform
Proposal.
Chicago,
IL:
American
Planning
Association.
“Chapter
1:
Contemporary

Townscapes:
A
Confluence
of
Land
Use
Decisions”,
“Chapter
2:
Planners
Marooned
Where
Public
and

Private
Interests
Meet”,
p.
1-‐52.

Hardin,
Garrett.
1968,
Dec.
13.
“The
Tragedy
of
the
Commons,”
Science
162(1968):1243-‐1248.

Accessed
1/9/09

at
http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_tragedy_of_the_commons.html.
pp
1-‐11.

Holston,
James.
1989.
“Chapter
2:
Blueprint
Utopia,
Chapter
Four:
The
Death
of
the
Street”
in
The
Modernist

City:
An
Anthropological
Critique
of
Brasilia.

Chicago:
The
University
of
Chicago
Press.
pp
31-‐58,
101-‐
144.

Kelbaugh,
Douglas.
2013.
The
Environmental
Paradox
of
the
City,
Landscape
Urbanism
and
New
Urbanism.
Copy

provided
to
Jennifer
Hurley
via
email
correspondence.
Shorter
version
of
paper
that
appeared
in
Duany,

Andres
and
Emily
Talen,
eds.
2013.
Landscape
Urbanism
and
Its
Discontents:
Dissimulating
the

Sustainable
City.
New
Society
Publishers.

Local
Government
Commission.
Unknown
date.
“Form-‐Based
Codes:
Implementing
Smart
Growth.”
Sacramento,

CA.

Accessed
7/14/05
at

http://www.lgc.org/freepub/PDF/Land_Use/fact_sheets/form_based_codes.pdf.

PlaceMakers.
2005.
“Early
County
Visual
Preference
Survey
Report.”
Unpublished
manuscript
prepared
for

Early2055.

of 9
Seltzer,
Ethan
and
Armando
Carbonell.
2011.
“Chapter
One:
Planning
Regions”
in
Seltzer,
Ethan
and
Armando

Carbonell.
ed.
Regional
Planning
in
America:
Practice
and
Prospect.
Cambridge,
MA:
Lincoln
Institute
of

Land
Policy.

Speck,
Jeff.
2012.
Walkable
City:
How
Downtown
Can
Save
America,
One
Step
at
a
Time.
New
York:
Farrar,

Strauss
and
Giroux.

Stilgoe,
John
R.
1998.
Outside
Lies
Magic:
Regaining
History
and
Awareness
in
Everyday
Places.
New
York:

Walker
and
Company.
Chapter
1:
Beginnings.

Lydon,
Mike.
2012.
Tactical
Urbanism
2:
Short-‐Term
Action
||
Long-‐Term
Change.
Street
Plans
Collaborative.

Accessed
4/9/14
at
http://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol_2_final.

Talen,
Emily.
2005.
New
Urbanism
&
American
Planning:
The
Conflict
of
Cultures.
New
York,
NY:
Routledge.

“Chapter
Three:
Principles:
Urbanism
vs.
Anti-‐Urbanism”,
“Chapter
Six:
Planned
Communities”,
“Chapter

Seven:
Regionalism”,
“Chapter
Eight:
Successes
and
Failures”,
“Chapter
Nine:
Conclusion:
The
Survival
of

New
Urbanism”,
pp
37-‐68,
158-‐212,
213-‐250,
251-‐273,
274-‐290.

Talen,
Emily.
2008.
Design
for
Diversity:
Exploring
Socially
Mixed
Neighborhoods.
New
York:
Routledge.

Tu,
Charles
C.
and
Mark
Eppli.
2001,
Fall.
An
Empirical
Examination
of
Traditional
Neighborhood
Development.

E-‐Publications@Marquette,
Marquette
University,
originally
published
in
Real
Estate
Economics,
vol
29,

no
3.

Tu,
Charles
C.
and
Mark
Eppli.
1997.
“Valuing
the
New
Urbanism:
The
Case
of
Kentlands.”
George
Washington

University
Department
of
Finance
Working
Paper.

Optional
Readings

Appleyard,
Donald,
M.
Sue
Gerson,
and
Mark
Lintell.
1981.
Livable
Streets.
Berkeley:
University
of
California

Press.
“Introduction,
Three
Streets
in
San
Francisco”,
“Early
Street
Battles
-‐

Introduction:
A
Brief

History”,
“Livable
Streets
and
Protected
Neighborhoods
–
Introduction:
A
Statement
of
Principles”,

pp

1-‐28,
147-‐156,
243-‐254

Baker,
Linda.
2006,
December
6.
“Where
the
Sidewalk
Ends:
Behavioral
psychology’s
unexpected
lesson
for

urban
design,”
Seed,
Accessed
12/12/06
at

http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/12/where_the_sidewalk_ends.php?page=all&p=y.

Burdette,
Jason
T.
2004,
April
19.
“Form-‐Based
Codes:
A
Cure
for
the
Cancer
Called
Euclidean
Zoning?”

Unpublished
MURP
Major
Paper,
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute
and
State
University,
Blacksburg,
VA.

Provided
to
Jennifer
Hurley
via
email
correspondence
with
author.

Duany,
Andrés
and
David
Brain.
2005.
“Regulating
as
if
Humans
Matter:
The
Transect
and
Post-‐Suburban

Planning,”
in
Ben-‐Joseph,
Erqan
and
Terry
S.
Szold,
eds.
Regulating
Place:
Standards
and
the
Shaping
of

Urban
America.
New
York:
Routledge.
pp
141-‐166.

Duany,
Andrés.
1991.
Lecture
in
San
Antonio.
Accessed
11/20/06
at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwd4Lq0Xvgc.

Farr,
Doug.
2009.
Sustainable
Urbanism
Lecture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSjurs4ZnlM&list=PLAC742F6545800FEC&index=1.

Gehl,
Jan.
2006.
“Close
Encounters
with
Buildings”
Urban
Design
11(29-‐47).

Accessed
1/22/06
at
www.palgrave-‐
journals.co.uk/udi.

Institute
of
Transportation
Engineers
and
Congress
for
the
New
Urbanism.
2010.
Designing
Walkable
Urban

Thoroughfares:
A
Context
Sensitive
Approach:
An
ITE
Recommended
Practice.
Washington,
DC:
Institute

of
Transportation
Engineers.

of 9
Le
Corbusier.
1987
[1929].
The
City
of
To-‐Morrow
and
Its
Planning.
New
York:
Dover
Publications.
“A

Contemporary
City,
The
Working
Day,
The
Hours
of
Repose”,
“The
Center
of
Paris”
pp
163-‐247,
277-‐289.

Moughtin,
Cliff.
2003,
3rd

ed.
Urban
Design:
Street
and
Square.
New
York:
Elsevier,
Architectural
Press.
“Basic

Design
Concepts,
Towns
and
Buildings,
The
Square
or
Plaza,
Streets”,
“Visual
Analysis”
pp
25-‐169,
209-‐
232.

Newman,
Oscar.
1973.
Defensible
Space:
Crime
Prevention
Through
Urban
Design.
New
York:
Collier
Books.
p.
1-‐
101.

Perry,
Clarence.
2007
[1929].
The
Neighborhood
Unit
(from
The
Regional
Plan
of
New
York
and
Its
Environs),
in

Larice,
Michael
and
Elizabeth
Macdonald,
eds.
The
Urban
Design
Reader.
New
York:
Routledge.
Pp
54-‐
65.

Rybczynski,
Witold.
2007.
Last
Harvest:
How
a
Cornfield
Became
New
Daleville.
New
York:
Scribner.

Scheer,
Brenda.
2001,
Fall.
“The
Anatomy
of
Sprawl”.
Places,
14(2).
Copy
provided
to
Jennifer
Hurley
via
email

correspondence
from
B.
Scheer.

Solomon,
Dan
and
Andres
Duany.
2012.
CNU20
–
Looking
Forward:
New
Urbanism
and
the
New
World.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6kO09bIq34&list=PLAC742F6545800FEC&index=10

Speck,
Jeff.
TEDTalk
on
the
Walkable
City:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wai4ub90stQ.

Weiss,
Marc
A.
1987.
The
Rise
of
the
Community
Builders:
The
American
Real
Estate
Industry
and
Urban
Land

Planning.
New
York:
Columbia
University
Press.
“Chapter
Two:
The
Rise
of
the
Community
Builders”,

“Chapter
Three:
Community
Builders
and
Urban
Planners”,
and
“Chapter
Four:
The
Los
Angeles
Realty

Board
and
Zoning”,
p.
17-‐106.

Whyte,
William
H.
1980.

The
Social
Life
of
Small
Urban
Spaces.
New
York:
Project
for
Public
Spaces.

Additional
Recommended
Readings
&
Background
Reference

“Special
Issue:
The
Transect.”
Journal
of
Urban
Design,
2002,
7(3).

Alminana,
Robert,
Paul
Crawford,
Andrés
Duany,
Laura
Hall,
Steve
Lawton,
and
David
Sargent.
2003,
February

10.
“White
Paper
on
Smart
Growth
Policy
in
California.”
Unpublished
manuscript
prepared
for
the
State

of
California,
Governor’s
Office
of
Planning
and
Research.
Provided
via
email
correspondence
with

author.

American
Planning
Association
(APA).
2006.
Planning
and
Urban
Design
Standards.
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
&

Sons,
Inc.
“Plan
Making”
and
selections
from
“Types
of
Plans”,
pp
3-‐26;
“Regionalism,
1910-‐1940”,
pp

77-‐78;
“New
Regionalism:
Environment,
Politics,
and
Planning”;
“Regions,”
pp
395-‐398;
Selections
from

“Legal
Foundations,”
pp
555-‐559,
563-‐565,
589,
593-‐603;
“Development
and
Approval
Process,”
pp
668-‐
670.

Arnstein,
S.,
1969.
“A
ladder
of
citizen
participation,”
Journal
of
the
American
Institute
of
Planners,
35:216–24.

reprinted
in
LeGates,
Richard
T.
and
Frederic
Stout,
ed.
2000.
The
City
Reader,
2nd

ed.
p.
244-‐255.

Aurbach,
Laurence.
2007,
February.
“Ped
Shed
>
Connectivity
Part
5:
Neighborhood
Crime,”
Pedshed.net,

Accessed
2/15/07
at
http://pedshed.net/?p=72.

Barnett,
Jonathan.
1982.
An
Introduction
to
Urban
Design.
New
York:
Harper
&
Row,
Publishers.
“Chapter
5:

Zoning,
Mapping,
and
Urban
Renewal
as
Urban
Design
Techniques”;
“Chapter
6:
The
Evolution
of
New

York
City’s
Special
Zoning
Districts”;
and
“Chapter
7:
Comprehensive
Policies
to
Replace
Special
Zoning

Districts”,
p.
57-‐124.

of 9
Berke,
Philip
R.,
David
R.
Godschalk,
and
Edward
J.
Kaiser.
2006.
Urban
Land
Use
Planning,
5th

ed.
“Rational

Planning”
in
“Chapter
2:
Shaping
Plans
Through
the
Sustainability
Prism
Model,”
pp
46-‐48,
“Chapter
3:

What
Makes
a
Good
Plan?”
pp
59-‐82,
selection
from
“Chapter
11:
The
Areawide
Land
Policy
Plan,”
pp

315-‐324,
selection
from
“Chapter
14:
Small-‐area
Plans,”
pp421-‐432.

Brigham,
Steven.
2006.
“Taking
Democracy
to
a
Regional
Scale
in
Hamilton
County,”
in
Bunker,
Barbara
Benedict

and
Billie
T.
Alban,
eds.
2006.
The
Handbook
of
Large
Group
Methods:
Creating
Systemic
Change
in

Organizations
and
Communities.
San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley
Imprint.
p.
231-‐245.

Brooks,
Michael
P.
2002.
Planning
Theory
for
Practitioners.
Chicago:
Planners
Press,
American
Planning

Association.

“Planning
is
Unconstitutional”
in
“Chapter
3:
Running
the
Gauntlet
of
Planning
Critics,”
pp

43-‐47
“Chapter
4:
Rationales
for
Public
Planning,”
pp
50-‐60,

“Chapter
6:
Centralized
Rationality:
The

Planner
as
Applied
Scientist,”
pp
81-‐95,
“Chapter
8:
Decentralized
Rationality:
The
Planner
as
Political

Activist,”
pp
107-‐117,
and
“Chapter
9:
Decentralized
Non-‐Rationality:
The
Planner
as
Communicator,”
pp

119-‐131.

Bunker,
Barbara
Benedict
and
Billie
T.
Alban.
2006
“Chapter
One:
That
Was
Then,
But
This
Is
Now:
The
Past,

Present,
and
Future
of
Large
Group
Methods”
and
“Introduction
to
Chapter
5:
Working
in
Communities

with
Diverse
Interest
Groups”,
in
Bunker,
Barbara
Benedict
and
Billie
T.
Alban,
eds.
The
Handbook
of

Large
Group
Methods:
Creating
Systemic
Change
in
Organizations
and
Communities.
San
Francisco,
CA:

Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley
Imprint.

p.
3-‐35,
199-‐205.

Burden,
Dan.
2001,
January
8.
“Building
Communities
with
Transportation,”
Distinguished
Lecture
Presentation,

Transportation
Research
Board,
Washington,
D.C.

Accessed
1/21/07
at

http://www.walkable.org/trbpaper.pdf.

Carlino,
Gerald,
Satyajit
Chatterjee,
and
Robert
Hunt.
“Urban
Density
and
the
Rate
of
Invention”.
Federal

Reserve
Bank
of
Philadelphia.
Working
Paper
NO.
06-‐14

Carmona,
Matthew,
Tim
Heath,
Taner
Oc,
and
Steven
Tiesdell.
2003.
Public
Places
–
Urban
Spaces:
The

Dimensions
of
Urban
Design.
New
York:
Architectural
Press.
Chapter
10:
The
development
process,

Chapter
11:
The
control
process,
and
Chapter
12:
The
communication
process.
pp
213-‐282.

Caro,
Robert
A.
The
Power
Broker:
Robert
Moses
and
the
Fall
of
New
York.

Carson,
Lyn
and
Janette
Hartz-‐Karp.
2005.
“Chapter
Eight:
Adapting
and
Combining
Deliberative
Designs”
in

Gastil,
John
and
Peter
Levine,
eds.
2005.
The
Deliberative
Democracy
Handbook:
Strategies
for
Effective

Citizen
Engagement
in
the
Twenty-‐First
Century.
San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley
Imprint.
p.
120-‐
138.

Crosby,
Ned
and
Doug
Nethercut.
2005.
“Chapter
Seven:
Citizens
Juries:
Creating
a
Trustworthy
Voice
of
the

People”
in
Gastil,
John
and
Peter
Levine,
eds.
2005.
The
Deliberative
Democracy
Handbook:
Strategies

for
Effective
Citizen
Engagement
in
the
Twenty-‐First
Century.
San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley

Imprint.
p.
111-‐119.

Daisa,
James
M.,
Erickson,
P.,
Dock,
F.
C.,
&
Ewing,
R.
et
al.
Context
Sensitive
Solutions
in
Designing
Major

Thoroughfares
for
Walkable
Communities.
(Washington,
DC:
Institute
of
Transportation
Engineers
(ITE),

2006)
download
from:
www.cnu.org.

Dorney,
Diane,
ed.
2001.
Council
Report
I:
Case
Studies,
Commentary
and
Critiques
of
Eight
New
Urbanist
Towns.

Gaithersburg,
MD:
The
Town
Paper.

Doyle,
Michael
and
David
Straus.
1982.
How
to
Make
Meetings
Work.
New
York:
Jove
Books.

Duany,
Andrés,
and
Elizabeth
Plater-‐Zyberk.
1991.
Towns
and
Town-‐Making
Principles.
Cambridge,
MA:
Harvard

University
Graduate
School
of
Design/Rizzoli.
pp.
7-‐24.

of 9
Duany,
Andrés,
Elizabeth
Plater-‐Zyberk,
and
Robert
Alminana.
2003.
The
New
Civic
Art:
Elements
of
Town

Planning.
New
York:
Rizzoli.

Duany,
Andrés,
William
Wright,
Sandy
Sorlien,
et
al.
“SmartCode
&
Manual”,
version
8.
New
Urban
Publications

Inc.
Accessed
May
2,
2007
at
http://www.smartcodecomplete.com/learn/downloads.html.

Duany,
Andrés.
2007,
April
24.
Testimony
to
the
Senate
Homeland
Security
and
Governmental
Affairs
Disaster

Recovery
Subcommittee
for
a
hearing
on
the
Federal
Emergency
Management
Agency’s
(FEMA)

disbursement
method
for
the
$400
million
Alternative
Housing
Pilot
Program
(AHPP).
Recording

provided
to
Jennifer
Hurley
via
email
from
Laurence
Aurbach.

Dunham-‐Jones,
Ellen
and
June
Williamson.
2008.
Retrofitting
Suburbia:
Urban
Design
Solutions
for
Redesigning

Suburbs.
Wiley.

Dyer,
Stephanie.
2003.
“Designing
‘Community’
in
the
Cherry
Hill
Mall:
The
Social
Production
of
a
Consumer

Space”
Perspectives
in
Vernacular
Architecture
Vol.
9,
Constructing
Image,
Identity,
and
Place.
pp
263-‐
275.

Accessed
1/22/07
at
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0887-‐
9885%282003%299%3C263%3AD%22ITCH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-‐A.

Easterling,
Keller.
1993.
American
Town
Plans:
A
Comparative
Timeline.
New
York:
Princeton
Architectural
Press.

Faga,
Barbara.
2006.
Designing
Public
Consensus:
The
Civic
Theater
of
Community
Participation
for
Architects,

Landscape
Architects,
Planners,
and
Urban
Designers.
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
&
Sons,
Inc.
“Chapter
3:

Planning
in
Public”,
p.
41-‐82;
also
selections
from
other
chapters,
p.
104-‐120,
214-‐215.

Fishkin,
James
and
Cynthia
Farrar.
2005.
“Chapter
Five:
Deliberative
Polling:
From
Experiment
to
Community

Resource”
in
Gastil,
John
and
Peter
Levine,
eds.
2005.
The
Deliberative
Democracy
Handbook:
Strategies

for
Effective
Citizen
Engagement
in
the
Twenty-‐First
Century.
San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley

Imprint.
p.
68-‐79.

Fung,
Archon.
2006,
December.
“Varieties
of
Participation
in
Complex
Governance”
Public
Administration

Review.
Special
Issue,
66-‐75.
Accessed
3/3/07
at
http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.brynmawr.edu.

Gieryn,
Thomas
F.
2000.
“A
Place
for
Space
in
Sociology”
Annual
Review
of
Sociology
26:464-‐496.

Accessed

1/22/07
at
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360-‐0572%282000%2926%3C463%3AASFPIS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-‐
S.

Goldsmith,
Stephen
and
William
D.
Eggers.
2004.
Governing
By
Network:
The
New
Shape
of
the
Public
Sector.

Washington,
DC:
Brookings
Institution
Press.
“Chapter
One:
The
New
Shape
of
Government”,
“Chapter

Two:
Advantages
of
the
Network
Model”,
“Chapter
Three:
Challenges
of
the
Network
Model”,
and

“Chapter
Four:
Designing
the
Network”,
p.
3-‐91.

Gordon,
Peter
and
Harry
W.
Richardson.

1998.
“A
Critique
of
New
Urbanism.”
Presented
at
the
November,
1998

Meeting
of
the
American
Collegiate
Schools
of
Planning
(Pasadena,
CA).

Accessed
12/18/06
at

http://www-‐rcf.usc.edu/~pgordon/urbanism.html.

Goss,
Jon.
1993,
March.
“The
‘Magic
of
the
Mall’:
An
Analysis
of
the
Form,
Function,
and
Meaning
in
the

Contemporary
Built
Environment.”
Annals
of
the
Association
of
American
Geographers.
83(1):18-‐47.

Accessed
1/30/07
at
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-‐
5608%28199303%2983%3A1%3C18%3AT%22OTMA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-‐7.

Gratz,
Roberta
Brandes.
2003.
“Jane
Jacobs
Legacy,”
in
Neal,
Peter,
ed.
Urban
Villages
and
the
Making
of

Community.
New
York:
Spon
Press,
Taylor
&
Francis
Group.

Handy,
Susan.
2004,
September
13.
“The
Built
Environment
and
Physical
Activity”
presentation
given
at
the
First

International
Keys
Symposium
on
Nutrition
and
Health:
The
International
Obesity
Epidemic.

Accessed

3/22/07
at
http://www.epi.umn.edu/about/sem_handy/handy.shtm.

Hassebroek,
Doug.
1999.
“Philadelphia’s
Postwar
Moment”
Perspecta
Vol
30,
Settlement
Patterns.
pp
84-‐91.

of 9
Hendriks,
Carolyn.
2005.
“Six:
Consensus
Conferences
and
Planning
Cells:
Lay
Citizen
Deliberations”
in
Gastil,

John
and
Peter
Levine,
eds.
2005.
The
Deliberative
Democracy
Handbook:
Strategies
for
Effective
Citizen

Engagement
in
the
Twenty-‐First
Century.
San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley
Imprint.
p.
80-‐110.

Herrera,
Philip.
1964,
August/September.
“Philadelphia:
How
Far
Can
Renewal
Go?”
Progressive
Architecture.

Hoch,
Charles
J.,
Linda
C.
Dalton,
and
Frank
S.
So,
eds.
2000.
The
Practice
of
Local
Government
Planning,
3rd

ed.

“Chapter
2:
Making
Plans,”
pp
19-‐39,
Chapter
14:
Zoning
and
Subdivision
Regulations,”
pp
343-‐374.

Holtzclaw,
John,
Robert
Clear,
Hank
Dittmar,
David
Goldstein,
Peter
Haas.
2002.
“Location
Efficiency:

Neighborhood
and
Socioeconomic
Characteristics
Determine
Auto
Ownership
and
Use
–
Studies
in

Chicago,
Los
Angeles
and
San
Francisco”
Transportation
Planning
and
Technology
25:1-‐27.

Innes,
Judith
E.
and
Devid
E.
Booher.
2003.
“The
Impact
of
Collaborative
Planning
on
Governance
Capacity”

Working
Paper
2003-‐03,
Institute
of
Urban
and
Regional
Development
University
of
California,
Berkeley.

Accessed
1/15/07
at
http://www-‐iurd.ced.berkeley.edu/pub/WP-‐2003-‐03.pdf.

Kaiser,
Edward
J.
and
David
R.
Godschalk.
1995.
“Twentieth
Century
Land
Use
Planning:
A
Stalwart
Family
Tree”

Journal
of
the
American
Planning
Association
61(3):365-‐385.

Kaner,
Sam
et
al.
2007.
Facilitator's
Guide
to
Participatory
Decision-‐Making.
Jossey-‐Bass.

Kaner,
Sam.
2006.
“Chapter
One:
Five
Transformational
Leaders
Discuss
What
They’ve
Learned”,
in
Schuman,

Sandy,
ed.
Creating
a
Culture
of
Collaboration:
The
International
Association
of
Facilitators
Handbook.
.

San
Francisco,
CA:
Jossey-‐Bass,
a
Wiley
Imprint.
p.
1-‐37.

Katz,
Peter.
1994.
The
New
Urbanism:
Toward
an
Architecture
of
Community.
New
York:
McGraw-‐Hill.

Kelly,
Stephanie
B.
2004.
Community
Planning:
How
to
Solve
Urban
and
Environmental
Problems.
“Chapter
4:

Historical
and
Political
Aspects
of
Planning
in
the
United
States,”
pp
45-‐57.

Kliment,
Stephen
A.
1973.
“Fall
and
rise
at
Society
Hill”
Progressive
Architecture
6(73):101-‐105.

Krumholz,
Norman.
1982,
June.
“A
Retrospective
View
of
Equity
Planning:
Cleveland
1969-‐1979,”
Journal
of
the

American
Planning
Association
48(2):163-‐174.

Kunstler,
James
Howard.
1993.
The
Geography
of
Nowhere.
New
York:
Simon
&
Schuster.
Here
are
some
favorite

excerpts:
“Scary
Places”
pp.
9-‐11(top);
“The
Evil
Empire”
pp.
113-‐131
(especially
121-‐124[top]
and
the

closing
paragraph
on
p.131);
“How
to
Mess
Up
A
Town”
pp.133-‐139;
“A
Place
Called
Home”
pp.166-‐
171(top);
“Better
Places”
pp.256-‐260(top)
and
last
full
paragraph
on
p.262
with
Calthorpe’s
take
on

nostalgia
versus
tradition.

Lang,
Jon.
2005.
Urban
Design:
A
Typology
of
Procedures
and
Products.
New
York:
Elsevier,
Architectural
Press.

Langdon,
Philip.
1994.
A
Better
Place
To
Live.
Amherst,
MA:
University
of
Massachusetts
Press.
Skim
Preface
(pp.

ix-‐xiv)
and
read
Chapter
1,
America’s
Failing
Suburbs,
pp.
1-‐26.

Le
Corbusier.
1986
[1931].
Towards
a
New
Architecture.
New
York:
Dover
Publications.
“Surface”,
“Architecture

or
Revolution”
pp
43-‐64,
267-‐289.

LeGates,
Richard
T.
and
Stout,
Frederic
eds.
The
City
Reader
(2nd

edition).
(New
York:
Routledge,
2000).

“Introduction”
(pp.
295-‐298),
“Modernism
and
Early
Urban
Planning”
to
page
310
(ending
before

“Planning
and
the
Great
Depression”),
Howard
(esp
326-‐327),
Le
Corbusier,
and
Wright
;
Section
7
–

Perspectives
on
Urban
Design,
Introduction
(pp.
463-‐465),
Camillo
(pp.
463-‐466),
Allan
Jacobs
&
Donald

Appleyard’s
“Toward
an
Urban
Design
Manifesto”
(pp.
491-‐502)

Lennertz
Coyle
and
Associates
and
Geoffrey
Ferrell
Associates.
Unknown
date.
“The
New
Pleasant
Hill
BART

Station
Property
Code:
Principles
and
Regulations
for
Redevelopment
of
the
BART
Station
Property.”

Accessed
10/29/01
at
http://www.co.contra-‐
costa.ca.us/depart/cd/charrette/outcome/PHCODE%20final.PDF

of 9
Lennertz,
Bill
and
Aarin
Lutzenhiser.
2006.
Charrette
Handbook:
The
Essential
Guide
for
Accelerated,

Collaborative
Community
Planning.
American
Planning
Association.
“Introduction”,
“1.1
Project

Assessment
and
Organization”,
“1.2
Stakeholder
Research,
Education,
and
Involvement”,
“1.3
Base
Data

Research
and
Analysis”,
“1.4
Project
Feasibility
Studies
and
Research”,
“1.5
Charrette
Logistics”,
“2.1

Organization,
Education,
Vision”,
“2.2
Alternative
Concepts
Development”,
“2.3
Preferred
Plan

Synthesis”,
“2.4
Plan
Development”,
“2.5
Production
and
Presentation”,
“Phase
Three:
Plan

Implementation
–
Introduction”,
p.
3-‐12,
33-‐120.

Leoncioni,
Patrick.
2002.
The
Five
Dysfunctions
of
a
Team:
A
Leadership
Fable.
Jossey-‐Bass.

Leoncioni,
Patrick.
2004.
Death
By
Meeting:
A
Leadership
Fable
.
.
.
About
Solving
the
Most
Painful
Problem
in

Business.
Jossey-‐Bass.

Leoncioni,
Patrick.
2006.
Silos,
Politics,
and
Turf
Wars:
A
Leadership
Fable
About
Destroying
the
Barriers
That

Turn
Colleagues
Into
Competitors.
Jossey-‐Bass.

Loukaitou-‐Sideris,
Anastasia,
Evelyn
Blumenberg,
and
Renia
Ehrenfeucht.2005.
“Sidewalk
Democracy:

Municipalities
and
the
Regulation
of
Public
Space,”
in
Ben-‐Joseph,
Erqan
and
Terry
S.
Szold,
eds.

Regulating
Place:
Standards
and
the
Shaping
of
Urban
America.
New
York:
Routledge.
pp
141-‐166.

Lund,
Hollie.
2003,
Autumn.
“Testing
the
Claims
of
New
Urbanism:
Local
Access,
Pedestrian
Travel,
and

Neighboring
Behavior,”
Journal
of
the
American
Planning
Association
69(4):414-‐429.
Accessed
1/22/07

at

http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.brynmawr.edu/pqdweb?index=23&did=443904111&SrchMode=1&sid=
1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1169496001&clientId=42764.

Madden,
Mary
E.
and
Bill
Spikowski.
“Placemaking
with
Form-‐Based
Codes”
Urban
Land
(Washington,
DC:
ULI,

2006).

Martins,
H.,
A.
I.
Miranda
and
C.
Borrego,
“Linking
Urban
Structure
and
Air
Quality,”
in
Proceedings
of
the
2007

Transportation,
Land
Use,
Planning
and
Air
Quality
Conference.
Transportation
Research
Board
of
the

National
Academies,
Washington,
DC,
2007.

McComas,
Katherine
A.
2001,
Feb.
“Theory
and
Practice
of
Public
Meetings”
Communication
Theory
11(1):36-‐55.

Accessed
3/3/07
at

Muller,
Peter
O.
1986.
“Transportation
and
Urban
Form:
Stages
in
the
Spatial
Evolution
of
the
Urban

Metropolis,”
Chapter
2
in
Hansen,
ed.
The
Geography
of
Urban
Transportation.
New
York:
Guilford

Press.
pp.
24-‐48.

Newman,
Oscar.
“Housing
Design
and
the
Control
of
Behavior.”
Community
of
Interest.
1980:
48-‐77.

Nivola,
Pietro
S.
1999.
Laws
of
the
Landscape:
How
Policies
Shape
Cities
in
Europe
and
America.
Washington,
DC:

Brookings
Institution
Press.
“Introduction”,

“Chapter
Three:
The
Not-‐So-‐Invisible
Hand”,

“Chapter
Four:

So
What?”,
“Chapter
Six:
Eight
Suggestions”,
p.
1-‐3,
12-‐51,
65-‐87.

Owen,
Harrison.

Open
Space
Technology:
The
Users
Guide.

Parolek,
Daniel
G.,
Karen
Parolek,
and
Paul
C.
Crawford.
2008.
Form-‐Based
Codes:
A
Guide
for
Planners,
Urban

Designers,
Municipalities,
and
Developers.
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
&
Sons,
Inc.
“Downtown
Master

Plan
and
Form-‐Based
Code:
Benicia,
CA,”
pp
217-‐222.

Peterson.
1980,
Spring.
“Space
and
Anti-‐space,”
Harvard
Architectural
Review,
1:
88-‐113.

Rittel,
H.
W.
J.,
&
Webber,
M.
(1973).
Dilemmas
in
a
General
Theory
of
Planning.
Policy
Sciences
4:155–169.
[RE

wicked
problems]

Sanoff,
Henry.

2000.
Community
Participation
Methods
in
Design
and
Planning.
New
York:
John
Wiley
&
Sons,

Inc.

of 9
Sargent,
Frederic
O.
“The
Legal
Framework
of
Planning,”
Chapter
14
in
Rural
Environmental
Planning.
Burlington,

VT:
The
University
of
Vermont,
Department
of
Resource
Economics.
Pp.
165-‐180.

Schwarz,
Roger.
2005.
“The
Skilled
Facilitator
Approach”
Chapter
2
in
Schuman,
Sandy,
ed.
The
IAF
Handbook
of

Group
Facilitation:
Best
Practices
from
the
Leading
Organization
in
Facilitation.
pp
21-‐34.

Shaviro,
Daniel.
1993.
“Tariffs,
Taxes,
and
Locational
Neutrality,”
Chapter
2
in
Federalism
in
Taxation:
The
Case

for
Greater
Uniformity,
pp.
6-‐29.

SPIDR
Environment/Public
Disputes
Sector
Critical
Issues
Committee.
1997.
“Best
Practices
for
Government

Agencies:
Guidelines
for
Using
Collaborative
Agreement-‐Seeking
Processes”,
Accessed
1/31/03
at

http://www.acresolution.org/research.nsf/key/EPPbestpractices.

Susskind,
Lawrence
and
Jeffrey
Cruikshank.
1989.
Breaking
the
Impasse:
Consensual
Approaches
to
Resolving

Public
Disputes.
New
York:
Basic
Books.

Talen,
Emily.
1999.
“Can
Sense
of
Community
be
Built?
An
Assessment
of
the
Social
Doctrine
of
New
Urbanism.”

Urban
Studies
36,
8:
1361-‐1379.

Accessed
1/13/07
at

http://www.urban.uiuc.edu/research/talen_papers/Sense%20of%20Community%20and%20Neighbourh
ood%20Form.pdf.

Talen,
Emily.
2000.

“Measuring
the
Public
Realm:

A
Case
Study.”

Journal
of
Architectural
and
Planning

Research
17,
4:
344-‐360.

Accessed
1/13/07
at

http://www.urban.uiuc.edu/research/talen_papers/Measuring%20the%20Public%20Realm.pdf.

Talen,
Emily.
2003.
“Neighborhoods
as
Service
Providers:
A
Methodology
for
Evaluating
Pedestrian
Access.”

Environment
and
Planning
B:
Planning
and
Design
30,
2:
181-‐200.

Accessed
1/13/07
at

http://www.urban.uiuc.edu/research/talen_papers/Neighborhoods%20as%20service%20providers.pdf.

Talen,
Emily.
2004/05,
Fall/Winter.
“A
Call
for
the
Radical
Revitalization
of
American
Planning.”
Harvard
Design

Magazine
No.
21:76-‐85.
Copy
provided
via
email
correspondence
from
E.
Talen.

Thadani,
Dhiru.
2010.
The
Language
of
Towns
and
Cities.
Rizzoli.

Tuecke,
Patricia.
2005.
“The
Architecture
of
Participation,”
Chapter
2
in
Schuman,
Sandy,
ed.
The
IAF
Handbook

of
Group
Facilitation:
Best
Practices
from
the
Leading
Organization
in
Facilitation.
pp
73-‐88.

Van
Bueren,
Ellen
M.,
Erik
Hans
Klijn,
and
Joop
F.
M.
Koppenjan.
2003.
“Dealing
with
Wicked
Problems
in

Networks:
Analyzing
an
Environmental
Debate
from
a
Network
Persepctive,”
Journal
of
Public

Administration
Research
and
Theory,
13(2):192-‐212.

Walt
Disney
Corporation.
1958.
Disneyland
TV
Show,
Magic
Highway
USA
episode.

Excerpt
accessed
1/29/10
at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6pUMlPBMQA.

Wang,
Xiaohu.
2001,
June.
“Assessing
Public
Participation
in
U.S.
Cities”
Public
Performance
&
Management

Review
24(4):322-‐336.
Accessed
3/3/07
at

Scholarly
Journals
of
Interest

Journal
of
Planning
Education
and
Research

Journal
of
Planning
Literature

Journal
of
the
American
Planning
Association
(formerly
Journal
of
the
American
Institute
of
Planners)

Journal
of
Public
Administration
Research
and
Theory

Journal
of
Urban
Design

Journal
of
Urbanism

Planning
Theory

of 9
Policy
Sciences

Public
Administration
Review

Town
Planning
Review

Magazines,
Newsletters,
and
Other
Publications
of
Interest

Governing

Better!
Cities
and
Towns
(formerly
New
Urban
News)

Planning
(published
by
the
American
Planning
Association)

The
Town
Paper

Urban
Land
(published
by
the
Urban
Land
Institute)

City365_0_Syllabus_v2_140409

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to City365_0_Syllabus_v2_140409

Similar to City365_0_Syllabus_v2_140409 (20)

City365_0_Syllabus_v2_140409