{"title":"Accessory Dwelling Units and Incremental Urbanism: Becoming 'Urban' or just 'Intensive Suburban'?","authors":"","doi":"10.2148/benv.49.1.39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As suburban environments are increasingly brought into the purview of urban planning, there is an emerging narrative of the importance of 'incremental urbanism' (Pinnegar et al., 2015). For some (Dovey, 2014) this presents an opportunity for a gentler approach to catalyse change in\n neighbourhoods with established communities and fragmented ownership patterns. Such change is hoped to overcome the perceived shortcomings of car dependency and housing homogeneity that typifies established suburbs. The Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) has entered the policy lexicon as an incremental\n pathway – or blending – from pre-existing suburban environments, where the 'sub' dissipates to leave just 'urban'. This paper presents an analysis of ADUs in Sydney, Australia, where we identify a series of challenges created by the introduction of policies to encourage ADUs in\n established suburbs. This includes increasing tenure informality and precarity, poor suitability of neighbourhoods for diverse people and households, and increased dependence on shared amenity. We argue that in the absence of any major effort to improve services and infrastructure, there is\n little evidence that neighbourhoods experiencing a high take-up of ADUs are transitioning to becoming more 'urban'. The fetishization of density in urban policy and development is leading to more 'intensive suburban' blendscapes that encapsulate the worst elements of both suburban and urban\n morphologies.","PeriodicalId":53715,"journal":{"name":"Built Environment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.49.1.39","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As suburban environments are increasingly brought into the purview of urban planning, there is an emerging narrative of the importance of 'incremental urbanism' (Pinnegar et al., 2015). For some (Dovey, 2014) this presents an opportunity for a gentler approach to catalyse change in
neighbourhoods with established communities and fragmented ownership patterns. Such change is hoped to overcome the perceived shortcomings of car dependency and housing homogeneity that typifies established suburbs. The Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) has entered the policy lexicon as an incremental
pathway – or blending – from pre-existing suburban environments, where the 'sub' dissipates to leave just 'urban'. This paper presents an analysis of ADUs in Sydney, Australia, where we identify a series of challenges created by the introduction of policies to encourage ADUs in
established suburbs. This includes increasing tenure informality and precarity, poor suitability of neighbourhoods for diverse people and households, and increased dependence on shared amenity. We argue that in the absence of any major effort to improve services and infrastructure, there is
little evidence that neighbourhoods experiencing a high take-up of ADUs are transitioning to becoming more 'urban'. The fetishization of density in urban policy and development is leading to more 'intensive suburban' blendscapes that encapsulate the worst elements of both suburban and urban
morphologies.
随着郊区环境越来越多地被纳入城市规划的范围,“增量城市化”的重要性正在出现(Pinnegar et al.,2015)。对一些人来说(Dovey,2014),这为一个更温和的方法提供了一个机会,以催化具有既定社区和分散所有权模式的社区的变革。这样的改变有望克服人们所认为的汽车依赖性和住房同质化的缺点,而这些缺点正是成熟郊区的典型特征。附属住宅单元(ADU)已作为一种增量途径——或混合——进入政策词典,从先前存在的郊区环境中,“sub”消散,只剩下“urban”。本文对澳大利亚悉尼的ADU进行了分析,我们在那里发现了一系列挑战,这些挑战是由于在已建立的郊区引入鼓励ADU的政策而造成的。这包括保有权的非正规性和不确定性增加,社区对不同人群和家庭的适应性较差,以及对共享便利设施的依赖增加。我们认为,在没有任何重大努力来改善服务和基础设施的情况下,几乎没有证据表明ADU使用率高的社区正在向更“城市化”过渡。城市政策和发展中对密度的迷恋导致了更“密集的郊区”混合景观,这些景观包含了郊区和城市形态中最糟糕的元素。