If “New Urbanism” has a PR firm it’s doing a good job. This movement among urban planners, developers, architects and others of their ilk, brought a sensibility of convenience to counter suburban sprawl. The San Francisco Chronicle and Seattle Times both featured local examples of communities built on the principles of New Urbanism in their Sunday editions, and the term is often cited in housing related articles across the country.

The Chronicle focused on transit villages, housing developments built adjacent to public transportation. The article delves into the harsh economics of Bay Area housing where people who would like to live closer to their jobs must move hours away for affordable real estate. Zoning codes unfriendly to mixed-use development make it difficult to build to the New Urbanism characteristics of clustering various housing types, retail and business, not to mention the headaches of expanding public transit.

Over in the Eastside of the Seattle area three “urban villages” in previously rural surroundings have been planned to the elements of New Urbanism, with high density houses, an emphasis on pedestrians and common areas for neighbors to socialize. But most residents still have to drive to work, angering long-time area residents who now have to contend with traffic, and promised nearby conveniences such as grocery stores and schools are yet to come. Overall, though, residents seem happy with their trade-offs, enjoying their community, local coffee shops, and patiently waiting for continued development to bring more amenities.