Series I: Projects, Plans, Codes

AK (Alaska)

AR (Arkansas)

AZ (Arizona)

CA (California)

Box 1

F1 Redwood City

1. Downtown Area Plan, Draft, 2001.

F2 Pittsburg/Bay Point

1. BART Station Area Specific Plan, Draft, 1997.
2. North Broadway/Bay Point Neighborhood Plan, 2001.

I1 Pittsburg/Bay Point – BART Station Area Specific Plan: Draft, Environmental Impact Report, 2001.

F3 Pleasant Hill

1. BART Station Area: Summary Report, 2001.
2. The New Pleasant Hill BART Station Property Code: Principles and Regulation for Redevelopment of the BART Station Property.
3. The New Pleasant Hill BART Station Property Code, Architectural Standards.

F4 Pleasant Hill

1. Community Plan: Pleasant Hill BART Station, 2001.
2. Pleasant Hill BART Property Charrette Process, 2001.
3. Pleasant Hill BART Property Charrette: Response to Questions, 2001.
4. Pleasant Hill BART Area Specific Plan, 1998.

F5 CA, General

1. “Land Recycling and the Creation of Sustainable Communities”, California Center for Land Recycling, 1998.
2. “Strategies for Promoting Brownfield Reuse in California”, California Center for Land Recycling, 1998.
3. “Strategies for Promoting Brownfield Reuse in California”, California Center for Land Recycling, Executive Summary, 1998.
4. Brownfield Redevelopment, Case Studies, California Center for Land Recycling, 2000.

CO (Colorado)

Box 1

F1 Denver

Highlands Garden Village: Design Requirements and Guidelines, 1998.

F2 Denver-Stapleton

1. Where is Denver Moving Next, 2002. (2 copies)

1 Denver-Stapleton — Design Book

2 Denver-Stapleton — Development Plan: Integrating Jobs, Environment and Community, 1995/1999.

Box 2

I1 Code: Model Land Use Code for Colorado’s Small Communities, Smart Growth, RMC, 2002.

CT (Connecticut)

DE (Delaware)

DC (District of Columbia)

Box 1

I1 Washington –

1. Report: Near Southeast Neighborhood & Waterfront Workshop, Charrette, Oct. 2000. (2 copies)

FL (Florida)

Box 1

F1 Abacoa

1. Information Packet. (3 copies)

I1 Celebration – Pattern Book

F2 Fort Pierce

1. Mediterranean Activity Book. (2 copies)
2. Brick and Masonry Activity Book
3. Wood Vernacular Activity Book
4. Correspondence
5. Progress Report 2002: Summary Public Improvements.
6. Historic Downtown
7. Fort Pierce by Ramon Pierce. (2 copies)
8. “Fort Pierce: A Town in Florida”, Ramon Trias.

F3 Miami

1. Miami – Aqua information packet. (2 copies)
2. Downtown Dadeland, Newsletter 2003.
3. Village of Key Biscayne, Traffic Calming Master Plan.

F4 Rosemary Beach

1. Correspondence
2. Information Packet

F5 Gainesville

1. Gainesville Land Development Code. (2 copies)

Box 2

F1 Tallahassee

1. Tallahassee – Welaunee information packet.

F2 Watercolor

1. Watercolor Information Packet.

F3 West Palm Beach

1. West Palm Beach – Northwest Neighborhood Strategic Development Plan, 2002.

F4 Windsor

1. Windsor – Community News.

F5 Orlando

1. Orlando – Baldwin Park Information packet.

I1 Orlando

1. Downtown Outlook: Orlando’s Plan for its Central City Neighborhood, EDAW for CRA, 2000.

I2 Dade – South Dade Greenway Network: Master Plan, 1994.

F6 General

1. “Building on Success: A Report form Eastward HO!”, Metro-Dade, 1997.
2. Infill Strategy Task Force, Metro-Dade, 1997.
3. Urban Design: Dade County, 1995.
4. “The Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida: Request for Your Comments”, 1995.
5. “Growth in South Florida: Making Rapid Change Sustainable.” South Dade Greenway Network, Executive Summary. (4 copies)

F7 Monroe County

Traditional Village Ordinance, 1997.
Correspondence, 1996.

Box 3

F1 General

1. “Sustainable Communities, Correspondence, 1998.”
2. “Sustainable Communities, Feedback.”
3. “Sustainable Communities Demonstration Project”, Article, 1998.
4. “Sustainable Communities Demonstration Project Legislative Report”, Dec. 1997.
5. “Florida Sustainable Communities Network Faces the Growth Challenge”, Dec. 1997.
6. “Living to Leave a Legacy”, Jan. 1998.

F2 Tampa

1. Tampa’s Redevelopment: New Visions and Strategies, Jan. 2004.

FF T1 Rosemary Beach – Master Plan, poster, 1996.

T2 Rosemary Beach – Illustrative Plan, poster, 1996.

T6 Rosemary Beach – Bird’s-Eye View, poster, 1996.

GA (Georgia)

Box 1

I1 Richmond Hill

1. “Ford Plantation: Architectural Pattern Book”, 1999.

F1 Atlanta

1. “Trends, Implications & Strategies for Balanced Growth in the Atlanta Region.”

HI (Hawaii)

ID (Idaho)

IL (Illinois)

Box 1

F1 Chicago

1. Personal Rapid Transit
2. “Using Geographic Information Systems for Intermodal Planning: NHS Connectors and Intermodal Inventory Development,” Chicago Area Transportation Study, 1995.
3. “Chicago Area Transportation Study”, Volume Three, 1962.

F2 Chicago

1. “Technical Evaluation of the Recommended 1995 Transportation System in Chicago/Gary Region,” 1974.
2. “Trip Generation Rates for Single Family Residential Developments in the Chicago Area,” 1986.
3. “1995 Transportation System Plan,” 1974.
4. “The Influence of an Expressway on Travel Parameters,“1965.

F3 Chicago

1. “Airport System Plan: Year 2000 Regional Airport System,” 1978.
2. “25 Years of Transportation Planning,” 1981.
3. “Three Case Studies of Planning for Suburban Arterial Street Corridors in Northeastern Illinois,” 1988.
4. “Weekend Expressway Travel,” 1986.
5. “The Effects of Various Traffic Volume, Control, and Roadway Conditions on Average Travel Speeds in the Chicago Area,” 1983.

F4 Chicago

1. Community Green Line Initiative.

F5 Grayslake – Prairie Crossing

1. “Design Guide,” 1999.
2. “Design Workshop: A Conservation Community,” 1999.
3. “Prairie Crossing Schemes,” Dec. 1998-Jan. 1999.

IN (Indiana)

Box 1

F1 Carmel -Village of Westclay

1. Village of Westclay Retail-Commercial Information
2. “Village of Westclay Covenants and Restrictions”
3. “Village of Westclay Ordinance Z-330”

F2 Carmel – Village of Westclay

1. Carmel – “Village of Westclay Building Guidelines and Requirements for Residential Construction.”
2. Carmel – Brenwick/Westclay Promotional Information

I1 Furnessville – Dunes Country Development Concept Plan

IA (Iowa)

KS (Kansas)

KY (Kentucky)

LA (Louisiana)

Box 1

I1 Baton Rouge – “Downtown Master Plan 1998-2008,” DPZ.

I2 Baton Rouge – “Tiger Town Charrette Booklet,” Charrette Design Group, 1999.

F1 Baton Rouge

1. Plan Progress Report, 2002.

MA (Massachusetts)

MD (Maryland)

Box 1

F1 Gaithersburg – Lakelands

1. Lakelands information packet

I1 Gibson’s Grant – A Traditionally Designed Residential Village on the Chester River

F2 General

1. Correspondence, 2002.
2. “Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation Initiatives.”
3. “Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation: Preserving What’s Best About Maryland,” 2001. (promotional folder)
4. “Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation: A Legacy for our Children,” 2000.
5. “Where Do We Grow From Here? A Teachers Resource Guide On Growth and its Impacts in Maryland.”
6. “Picture Maryland: Where Do We Grow From Here?”
7. “Smart Growth In Maryland,” 2001.

F3 General

1. Maryland Building Rehabilitation Code: Smart Codes, 2001.
2. “General Plan Refinement Goals and Objectives: On Wedges and Corridors,” Draft, 1992.

FF T3 Kentlands – The Kentlands Code, Master Plan, poster, 1993.

ME (Maine)

1. FF T5 West Rockport — Ingraham Corner Regulating Plan

MI (Michigan)

Box 1

I1 Pontiac – Master Plan Crystal Lake Neighborhood, (Hope VI), 2001.

F1 Royal Oak

1. “Community Visions of Royal Oak: Re-Building The American Small Town.”

MN (Minnesota)

Box 1

I1 Stillwater

1. Stillwater – Liberty on the Lake, promotional material

F1 St. Paul

1. St. Paul on the Mississippi Development Framework, 1997.

F2 St. Paul

1. “Westside Flats Master Plan and Development Guidelines,” 2001.
2. “Seven Corner’s Gateway Plan Design Charrette,” 2000.

F3 St. Paul

1. North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition, 1998.

MO (Missouri)

MS (Mississippi)

MT (Montana)

NC (North Carolina)

Box 1

F1 Durham

1. Southern Pines, Pines, Pinehurst, Aberdeen: Land Development Standards Code.

I1 Wilmingon – “Jervay Place Revitalization Plan,” (Hope VI), 2000.

I2 Wilmington – “Sunset South Neighborhood,” (Hope VI), 2000.

I3 Durham – “Trinity Heights Planting and Gardening Guide: An Owners’ Landscaping Manual,” William Scott White.

I4 Durham – “Trinity Heights: A Community Development for Duke University,” Traditional Neighborhood Development Partmers.

ND (North Dakota)

NE (Nebraska)

NH (New Hampshire)

Box 1

F1 Rochester

1. “Rochester Land-Use Master Plan.”

NJ (New Jersey)

Box 1

I1 General – “Planning for Transit Friendly Land-Use: A Handbook for New Jersey Communities,” 1994.

NM (New Mexico)

Box 1

F1 Albuquerque — Dona Ana

1. Dona Ana Plaza Plan, University of New Mexico, Moule and Polyzoides, July 2001.
2. Correspondence Dona Ana with Graham Foundation, Jan. 2002.
3. Correspondence, Jan. 2002.
4. Correspondence, Jan. 2002.
5. Correspondence, Jan. 2002.
6. New Mexico Plazas Project, Summary.
7. Graham Foundation Grants, Article.

F2 Albuquerque

1. “Downtown 2010 Sector Development Plan,” City of Albuquerque, 2000.
2. “Mesa del Sol Level A Strategic Master Plan,” 1997.

I1 Los Alamos – Quemazon Master Plan, Moule and Polyzoides, 1998.

I2 Los Alamos – Downtown Master Plan, Moule and Polyzoides, 2000.

NY (New York)

Box 1

F1 Albany

1. “AveNew 2000 – Central Avenue Revitalization Executive Summary,” City of Albany Central Business Improvement District, 2000.

I1 Brooklyn – Brooklyn Neighborhoods Cooper Robertson and Partners.

F2 Brooklyn

1. “Arvene and Edgemere Houses Revitalization Plan & Design Work,” Master Plan, NYC Housing Authority, (Hope VI), Dec. 2001. Correspondence (3 pages)

F3 Westport Village

1. “Westport Village – Development and Preservation Program,” 1977.

NV (Nevada)

OH (Ohio)

Box 1

F1 Shaker Heights – “Strategic Investment Plan, Final Report,” 2000.

OK (Oklahoma)

OR (Oregon)

Box 1

F1 Portland

1. Sellwood-Moreland Neighborhood Plan, 1998.

F2 Portland

1. “Housing Alternatives for Our Neighborhoods.”
2. “City Council Report: Base Zone Design Standards for Houses, Attached Houses and Duplexes,” 1999.
3. “Community Building Sourcebook,” 1998.
4. “10 Essentials for North/Northeast Portland Housing.”

F3 Portland-Cascade Station

1. Cascade Station/Portland International Center Plan District, 1999.

F4 Portland – Fairview Village

1. Fairview Village, project booklet (2 copies)
2. Tudor Row pamphlet
3. Duplexes pamphlet
4. Office Building pamphlet
5. Apartments pamphlet
6. Row Houses pamphlet
7. Row Houses pamphlet
8. Row Houses pamphlet
9. Information pamphlet (2 copies)
10. The Village News, May 1998.

F5 Oregon – General

1. Governor’s Livability Awards, booklet, 1995-2001.
2. Governor’s Livability Awards, Two Rivers Market.
3. Governor’s Livability Awards, Princeton Village.
4. Governor’s Livability Awards, City Life.
5. Governor’s Livability Awards, Fairview Village.
6. Governor’s Livability Awards, Orenco Station.
7. Governor’s Livability Awards, West Bend.

F6 Portland – General

1. “Executive Order No.E0-00-23”
2. “The Oregon Livability Initiative”
3. Oregon Development (12 pages)

F7 Oregon – General

1. “Oregon’s Transportation and Growth Management Program Report,” 1999-2001.
2. “The Principles of a Balanced Transportation Network:
3. Implementing the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule.”
4. “Tools of the Trade,” Transportation and Growth Management Program, Oregon DOT, and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development.

F8 Oregon – General

1. “Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines: An Oregon Guide for Reducing Street Widths.”
2. Correspondence
3. “Main Street?When a Highway Runs Through it: A Handbook for Oregon Communities.”
4. “Parking Made Easy: A Guide to Taming the Downtown Parking Beast,” 2001
5. “House Plans for Narrow and Small Lots: A Catalogue for Oregon’s Developers and Communities,” 1997.
6. “Planning for Residential Growth: A Workbook for Oregon’s Urban Areas,” 1997.

Box 2

F1 Oregon – General

1. “Commercial and Mixed-Use Development,” Code Handbook.
2. “Smart Development,” Code Handbook.
3. “Appendix Smart Development,” Code Handbook.
4. “The Infill and Redevelopment,” Code Handbook

F2 Oregon – General

1. “Growth and Its Impacts in Oregon: A Report from Gov. Kitzhaber’s Task Force on Growth in Oregon,” 1999.

I1 Oregon – General “Model Development Code & User’s Guide for Small Cities,” Sept. 1999.

PA (Pennsylvania)

Box 1

F1 Pittsburgh

1. “Pittsburgh Downtown Plan: A Blueprint for the 21st Century.”

RI (Rhode Island)

SC (South Carolina)

Box 1

F1 Charleston – Daniel Island

1. Almanac, Daniel Island Real Estate Co, LLC, Spring 2002.

F2 Charleston – Belle Hall

1. “Belle Hall Plantation Charrette: Analysis of Storm water Runoff between Traditional or Sprawl Development Scenarios, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, 1995.

F3 Habersham – Beaufort

1. Promotional packet, multiple items.
2. Promotional packet, multiple items.

F4 Myrtle Beach

1. “Urban Village Development Regulations/Guidelines,” 1998.
2. “Urban Village District Zoning Code,” Design Works, LLC, Jonathan Barnett.

I1 Myrtle Beach – “Urban Village Redevelopment Master Plan,” Design Works, LLC, 1998.

SD (South Dakota)

TN (Tennessee)

TX (Texas)

Box 1

F1 Fort Worth

1. “Fort Worth South Urban Design Guidelines,” working paper, 2001.
2. “Fort Worth South Annual Report,” 2001.

I1 El Paso – “Hueco Master Plan,” 2000.

F2 El Paso

1. 1925 City Plan
2. Rim-University Neighborhood Plan, 2001.

F3 Denton

1. Zoning Map
2. Environmental Map
3. Mobility and Connectivity Plan Map
4. The Denton Visual Quality Survey Project Summary

I2 Denton – “Comprehensive Plan of the City of Denton,” 1999-2020 (2 copies)

I3 Denton – “Denton Development Code,” 2002.

UT (Utah)

Box 1

F1 Provo

1. Riverwoods Mixed-Use Community
2. The Village at Riverwoods, promotional packet.
3. The Shops at Riverwoods, promotional packet.

VA (Virginia)

Box 1

F1 Manassas Park

1. “Urban Design Concept Plan,” Final Report, 2001.
2. “Urban Design Concept Plan, Phasing Strategy and Conceptual Cost Estimates for Public Improvements,” 2001.
3. Correspondence, 2002.

F2 Loudoun

1. Correspondence, 2003.
2. “Rural Hamlets, Villages and Towns in Loudoun County,” Congress for a New Urbanism, 1993.
3. “Vision for the Future of Loudoun,” 1988.
4. “Vision for the Future of Loudoun,” 1989.
5. “Vision for the Future of Loudoun: Rural Loudoun through Compact Communities.”
6. “Loudoun County Rural Villages Feasibility Analysis: Freemont and Black Oak Prototypes,” 1989.
7. Loudoun – Village of Black Oak, 10 photos.

F3 Charlottesville – Springridge

1. Correspondence, 2002.
2. Information pamphlet

F4 Virginia – General

1. “Better Models for Development in Virginia: Ideas for Creating, Maintaining and Enhancing Livable Communities,” Sept. 2001.
2. Correspondence, 2002.

VT (Vermont)

WA (Washington)

Box 1

F1 Mercer Island

1. “Town Center Design Charrette.”

WI (Wisconsin)

Box 1

F1 Kenosha

1. “Harborpark Master Plan,” 1997.
2. “Zoning Ordinance, Land Use Plan, Design Guidelines,” 1999-2000.
3. “Harborpark: A New Waterfront Community,Neighborhood Code,” 1999.

F2 Madison – Middleton Hills

1. Wisconsin Architect, article, 1999.
2. Wisconsin Trails, article, 2002.
3. Correspondence, 2002.

I1 Madison – Middleton Hills – “Designing for Middleton Hills:

1. A Traditional Neighborhood Development,” University of Wisconsin, 1995.

I2 Madison – Middleton Hills – “Neighborhood Code and Covenants.”

I3 Milwaukee – “A Vision for Smart Growth: Sustainable Development Design Charrette Milwaukee’s Menomonee River Valley,” 1999-2000.

WY (Wyoming)

B: INTERNATIONAL PROJECTS

Format: Country, Box, F/I, Place

Australia

Box 1

F1 Western Australia

1. “Butler-Brighton Charrette: Accommodating Future Growth through Livable Neighborhoods Principles,” Aug. 2002.
2. “Livable Neighborhoods Community Design Code: A Western Australian Government Sustainable Cities Initiative”, Edition I, Dec. 1997.

F2 Western Australia – City of Gosnells

1. Correspondence, Jan. 2002.
2. “Safe City: Urban Design Strategy.”
3. Urban Design Guidelines
4. “The Revitalization of Gosnells Town Center.”

F3 Maroochy Shire
Correspondence, 2002.
Information Package

I1 Nambour Local Area Plan, 1998.

I2 Yandia Local Area Plan, 1998.

I3 Woombye Local Area Plan, 1998.

I4 Palmwoods Local Area Plan, 1998.

I5 Eudlo Local Area Plan, 1998.

I6 Coolum Local Area Plan, Draft, 1997.

I7 MooLooLaba Forward Plan, 1997.

I8 “Communities Creating Vision,” Preliminary Master Plan, 2001.

Canada

Box 1

F1 Ontario – Markham

1. Correspondence, April 2002.
2. Correspondence, March 2001.
3. “Official Plan Amendment and Secondary Plan Cornell,” 1994.
4. “Official Plan Amendment and Secondary Plan Angus Glen,” 1994.
5. “Villages of Angus Glen Design Guidelines,” 1996.
6. “Urban Design and Amenity Guidelines,” Draft, 1997.

F2 Ontario – Markham

1. “Cornell Public Real Design Guidelines,” 1997.
2. “Cornell Architectural Control Guidelines,” 1997.
3. “Official Plan Amendment and Secondary Plan Central Area Planning District,” 1997.
4. “Design Implementation Guidelines,” 1998.
5. “Highway Seven Streetscape Study,” 1999.

F3 Ontario – Markham

1. “The Wismer Commons Community in the Town of Markham – Architectural Design Guidelines,” 2000.
2. “Woodbine Corridor Urban Design Study,” 2001.
3. “Markham Canada’s Centre of Excellence for New Urbanism,” Packet.
4. “Wismer Commons, Community Design Plan,” April 2000.

F4 Vancouver

1. “Southeast False Creek Policy Statement,” Oct. 1999.

I1 Brentwood – “Sustainable Urban Landscapes, The Brentwood Design Charrette,” 1999.

I2 Surrey – “Sustainable Urban Landscapes, The Surrey Design Charrette,” 1996.

I3 British Columbia – “Sustainable Urban Landscapes, Site Design Manual for BC Communities,” 2002.

F5 Toronto

1. “A Citizen’s Guide to Built Form and Density,” Draft, Dec. 1995.

Belgium

Box 1

I1 Hoog-Latem Master Plan, Matexi/Habitus, Jan. 2002.

I2 Nivelles “Expose de la Charrette,” Oct. 2001.

I3 “Godveerdegem-Zottegem Master Plan,” Charrette Document, March 1999.

I4 “Heule Master Plan,” Feb. 2000.

Other International

Box 1

F1 Colombia

1. Bogot? – correspondence with Elsa Patricia Bohorquez C., 2002.

F2 France

1. Paris – “La Metropole Imaginaire,” Un Atlas de Paris Institut Francais d’Architecture.

F3 Germany

1. Berlin – “Planungen fur die Hauptstadt 10 Jahre Hauptstadtbeschluss,” Nov. 2001.
2. Industrielles Gartenreich, Jahresbericht, 1992.
3. Wohin mit Stillgelegtem? Teil 1, 1996.
4. Reisen in das Industrielle Gartenreich Dessau Witteberg Bitterfeld (folder).
5. Bitterfelder Zeitung, article.
6. Mitteldeutsche Zeitung, article, 1992.
7. Mitteldeutsche Zeitung, article, 2001.
8. “New Urbanism and Europe: Bauhaus and New Urbanism – the Oppositions Come into Touch,” 2001.
9. “New Urbanism makes inroads in Germany,” New Urban News, 2002. (2 copies)
10. Miami – Bauhaus flier

F4 India

1. New Bombay – “Ghansoli Node Proposed Neighborhood and District Plan,” 1997.
2. Indore – “Aranya: An Approach to Settlement Design,” 1990.

F5 Mexico

1. Chihuahua – “Tres Torres: Ciudad Juarez,” Moule and Polyzoides, May 2003.

F6 Poland

1. Poznan – Concept Plan, July 2000.

C: CODES

1. TND (TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT)

This section includes drafts, personal notes, and historic versions of codes significant in the New Urbanism.

Box 1

F1 General

1. Traditional Village District, Land Use Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the Town of Rockport, Maine, Nov. 1989.
2. Ordinance Creating Traditional Neighborhood Development District, Dade County, FL, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk Notes.
3. Ordinance Creating Traditional Neighborhood Development District, Dade County, FL, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk Notes, Feb. 20, 1990.
4. Ordinance Creating Traditional Neighborhood Development District, Dade County, FL, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk Notes, March 13, 1990.

F2 General

1. Correspondence, Computerizing Seaside Code, April 3, 1989.
2. Correspondence, Computerizing Seaside Code, April 13, 1989.
3. Correspondence, Computerizing Seaside Code, April 24, 1989.
4. Correspondence, Computerizing Seaside Code, March 13, 1989.
5. “Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance,” Generic, Dec. 13, 1988.
6. “Traditional Rural Village Ordinance,” The County of Loudoun, Commonwealth of Virginia, Nov. 25, 1988
7. “The Foundation for Traditional Neighborhoods, Inc.,” Articles of Agreement, New Hampshire.
8. “The Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance,” April 20, 1989.
9. T.N.D. Ordinance: Traditional Neighborhood Design, Poster (Large).
10. T.N.D. Ordinance: Traditional Neighborhood Design, Poster (Small).

2. TOD (TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT)

This section includes transit-oriented development materials that transcend place and project, and historically significant projects.

3. TRANSECT AND SMART CODE

This section includes smart codes, writing on the use and understanding of the transect and smart codes, and historically significant projects.

Box 1

I1 Smartcode, V5.2, July 14, 2003.

F1 Publications

1. Duany, Andres “Introduction to the Special Issue: The Transect,” Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2002.
2. Duany, Andres and Emily Talen “Transect Planning,” APA Journal Vol. 68, No. 3, 2002.
3. Duany, Andres and Talen, Emily “Making the Good Easy: The Smart Code Alternative,” Fordham Law Journal Vol. XXIX No. 4, April 2002.
4. Duany, Andres “A New Theory of Urbanism,” Scientific America, Vol. 283, No. 6, 2000.
5. “A Comprehensive Smart Growth Municipal Ordinance,” Smartcode.

4. OTHER
INVENTORY: NEW URBANISM COLLECTION

SERIES I: PROJECTS, PLANS, CODES

D. REGIONAL

Box 1
F1 General
“A Network of Livable Communities: Evaluating Travel Behavior Effects of Alternative Transportation and Community Designs for the National Capital Region,” May 1996.
“A Better Way to Grow: For More Livable Communities and a Healthier Chesapeake Bay,” 1998.

INVENTORY: NEW URBANISM COLLECTION

E. POLICY

Box 1

F1 General