[jmull]

I think it’s a “rally the supporters” type of thing.

CNU — the Congress for the New Urbanism — is a group of people who would like towns, cities, etc. to be designed differently.

So this article suggests the attractive notion that the opportunity to redesign these things is “coming soon”. So far, so good.

But then it takes an odd turn and enumerates two ways NOT to redesign things. That seems to really blunt the force of the message. But perhaps they are having a hard time agreeing on a vision, and this is a baby step toward narrowing down the range of the debate? It’s always easy to assemble a group of people who are dissaisfied by the way things are. But much harder to get them to agree on the way things should be.

Personally, I’m somewhat doubtful of “urbanism” at all. Perhaps wide-spread remote work and remote shopping will weaken the need for people to live in specific area near where the jobs are and near where the stuff is, and perhaps without those forces, the downsides of urban living may override the upsides and urban centers will no longer hold together. (Just speculation, though, of course.)

[icebraining]

I think the message here is intended to be read by other new urbanists, not by the general public. The historical review and prediction of a new reset are just the prelude to set the topic, not the main message - that's the "threats" part.