Local communities, ecology, and planning 299entered from a back alley; manicured, rather uniform planted areas; a distinct
town center with shops and restaurants; sections or neighborhoods somewhat
separated by water or greenspace (e.g., riparian strip or golf course); real-estate
marketing; a relatively high density of people; social interactions; upper mid-
dle class values and aesthetics; and a regulated ordered conformity produced
byplanning. Of course these and other emphases vary by town. For new urban-
ist towns these patterns emanate from 27 listed principles largely driven by
land development and social community (Congress for the New Urbanism2000,
Duanyet al.2000). The social, economic, and planning dimensions are grist for
much evaluation and discussion (Katz1994,Duanyet al.2000,Lund 2003, Garde
2004).
In contrast, natural systems, habitat, and environmental dimensions over-
all have been of tangential interest. These towns take up space, either habi-
tats for species or places for us, so a rigorous ecological evaluation is needed.
Some preliminary observations here emphasize the point. Habitat, species diver-
sity, and rare species are largely ignored or minimized. Environmental monitor-
ing, management, and improvement are often absent. Hydrologic groundwater
protection and habitat restoration are typically unaddressed. Habitat connec-
tivity for regional wildlife movement is normally missed. Ecological impacts
of traffic noise and pollutants (considerable traffic results from few or distant
jobs) remain unaccounted for. Adaptive management for water conservation,
stormwater runoff control, energy use, and water and air pollution is generally
overlooked. Consider briefly some examples:
Reston, Virginiawasbuilt in a rural landscape in the 1960s, then engulfed
bysprawl, and recently a people-oriented small-city center with
ahigh density of people, walkways, shops, offices, and restau-
rants was inserted. Over time a planned town changes, in
thiscase a metamorphosis catalyzed by the transformed land
around it.
The Woodlands, Texas,begun in the 1970s with a major goal of control-
ling floods in the community, in one sense was a smashing
success by tailoring development to the capacity of different
local soil types to absorb rainwater. Natural vegetation support-
ing rich biodiversity remains in front yards and back yards of
most houses. Yet, in the pre-landscape-ecology era, the town
plan effectively designed against an important icon species, the
red-cockaded woodpecker, which requires a large natural area
containing large pines and thrived next door in Texas’ first state
park.