density - Yule Heibel on Diigo

11 Sep 09

Forget Curbing Suburban Sprawl (MIT Technology Review)

I have some questions about the source of this report/ research, which claims that density (including examples such as Vancouver's eco-density) "would yield insignificant CO2 reductions."
QUOTE
Even if 75 percent of all new and replacement housing in America were built at twice the density of current new developments, and those living in the newly constructed housing drove 25 percent less as a result, CO2 emissions from personal travel would decline nationwide by only 8 to 11 percent by 2050, according to the study. If just 25 percent of housing units were developed at such densities and residents drove only 12 percent less as a result, CO2 emissions would be reduced by less than 2 percent by 2050.
UNQUOTE

I guess the problem is with defining real density as a mere "twice the density of current new developments": if you consider that new developments include suburban greenfield spreads on 1/4 to 1/2 acre for each SFH, then doubling that density really doesn't amount to much.

Further down, the report just makes the case for building more fuel-efficient cars - so maybe that's where the report's agenda originates.

www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx - Preview

mit_techreview sprawl urbanplanning phil_mckenna density national_academy_of_sciences

25 Jun 09

Party Animals: Early Human Culture Thrived in Crowds | LiveScience

Article reports on research (noted & bookmarked earlier: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-06/ucl-hpd060109.php) arguing the benefits of density (in early urban settings), which accelerated intellectual and cultural development.

www.livescience.com/...04-human-behavior-evolved.html - Preview

urbanization urban_development urban_energy cities population density

08 Jun 09

High population density triggers cultural explosions

Report on a new study by University College London that high population densities enable cultural & technical innovation. This directly results in modern human behavior, by which the authors mean "a radical jump in technological and cultural complexity," including "symbolic behavior" (abstract & realistic art, body decoration, etc.; music, and other technical innovations). The study aims to explain why advanced behavior and technology only begin to "explode" around 45,000 years ago - even though humans had been around for 160,000 to 200,000 years.

"Ironically, our finding that successful innovation depends less on how smart you are than how connected you are seems as relevant today as it was 90,000 years ago."

www.eurekalert.org/...ucl-hpd060109.php - Preview

urbanization urban_development urban_energy cities population density

complex skills learnt across generations can only be maintained when there is a critical level of interaction between people
high and low-skilled groups could coexist over long periods of time and that the degree of skill they maintained depended on local population density or the degree of migration between them
2 more annotations...
- "Modern humans have been around for at least 160,000 to 200,000 years but there is no archaeological evidence of any technology beyond basic stone tools until around 90,000 years ago. In Europe and western Asia this advanced technology and behaviour explodes around 45,000 years ago when humans arrive there, but doesn't appear in eastern and southern Asia and Australia until much later, despite a human presence. In sub-Saharan Africa the situation is more complex. Many of the features of modern human behaviour – including the first abstract art – are found some 90,000 years ago but then seem to disappear around 65,000 years ago, before re-emerging some 40,000 years ago.
  
  "Scientists have offered many suggestions as to why these cultural explosions occurred where and when they did, including new mutations leading to better brains, advances in language, and expansions into new environments that required new technologies to survive. The problem is that none of these explanations can fully account for the appearance of modern human behaviour at different times in different places, or its temporary disappearance in sub-Saharan Africa."
- "Ironically, our finding that successful innovation depends less on how smart you are than how connected you are seems as relevant today as it was 90,000 years ago."

14 Jan 09

Creative Class » Blog Archive » Design and the Crisis - Creative Class

Left a comment on this entry by Richard Florida. His post was actually about design, and how it could change under economic pressure. But then someone left a comment about how bad urban 'density' is and that it benefits only developers and tax-hungry governments. Well, I couldn't let nonsense like that stand, so I posted a comment in defense of urban density. File it under "really, some people...!"

www.creativeclass.com/...design-and-the-crisis - Preview

urbanism density comments design

01 Jan 09

The economic impact of high density development and tall buildings in central business districts: British Property Federation

A 9/10/08 pointer to a 44-pg PDF, "The economic impact of high density development and tall buildings in central business districts: British Property Federation." From the description:
QUOTE
There is increasing recognition of the need to increase the density of commercial development, especially in the centres of our towns and cities. The sustainability benefits of high density are relatively well known. For example, less urban sprawl means less need to use greenfield sites, more use of public transport and, with mixed use developments, a reduced need to travel.

However, there is also an economic case for increased commercial density, as specified in Policy Planning Statement (PPS) 6 and the State of the English Cities. In current debates about increasing commercial density in London – including through tall buildings – this economic element has been little mentioned, and is perhaps little understood.

This research has sought to explain and estimate the economic costs and benefits of high density commercial development in central business districts. The aim is to provide a more rounded picture of the economic impact of high density development and to strengthen the assessment of such development.
UNQUOTE

www.bpf.org.uk/...-in-central-business-districts - Preview

central_business_districts cities urbanism economic_development tall_buildings high_rise density

There is increasing recognition of the need to increase the density of commercial development, especially in the centres of our towns and cities. The sustainability benefits of high density are relatively well known. For example, less urban sprawl means less need to use greenfield sites, more use of public transport and, with mixed use developments, a reduced need to travel.

However, there is also an economic case for increased commercial density, as specified in Policy Planning Statement (PPS) 6 and the State of the English Cities. In current debates about increasing commercial density in London – including through tall buildings – this economic element has been little mentioned, and is perhaps little understood.

This research has sought to explain and estimate the economic costs and benefits of high density commercial development in central business districts. The aim is to provide a more rounded picture of the economic impact of high density development and to strengthen the assessment of such development.

11 Nov 08

The Housing Affordability Problem Has Not Gone Away

Excellent blog post by Donald Elliott on why and how (un)affordability is systemic, and what (little) steps municipalities can take to mitigate the problem.
QUOTE
What can local government do? It cannot solve the macro-economic problem, but it can remove barriers that drive housing prices even higher than they need to be. Minimum lot size and minimum house size requirements are two of the main culprits. Artificially low multi-family densities are another, and narrow definitions of allowable housing types are a third.
UNQUOTE

abetterwaytozone.com/...lity-problem-has-not-gone-away - Preview

affordability housing planning urbanplanning density donald_elliott

Over the past two years, news from the housing industry has not been good.
So with prices falling, the housing affordability crisis must now be behind us – right? Wrong. In A Better Way to Zone I describe the housing affordability crisis as a structural problem of the U.S. economy and that is still true. Business cycles come and go, and this recession will in time bottom out and the housing economy will rebound. The long term effects may be a slight lowering of average housing prices – but not much, and not over the long haul. The key problem remains – the U.S. economy is simply not creating jobs that pay (on average) what it costs to build new housing (on average) and that gap continues to widen.
6 more annotations...
- In fact, that difficult fact is what fed the desire to create sub-prime mortgages – since we could not increase average wages and we could not lower the costs of building a house, the home finance industry found a way to bridge that gap by letting less money buy more house (temporarily). The recession may narrow that the gap by deflating home sale prices and bringing them a little closer to the buying power of some households, but it doesn’t change the basic mismatch between wages and housing construction costs. And the problem will get worse, because global economic pressures will continue to push wages down and the burgeoning demand (especially from the exploding middle classes in China, India, and elsewhere) will keep driving the price of housing inputs up.
- cities are asking for broader and more powerful tools to address housing affordability.
- What can local government do? It cannot solve the macro-economic problem, but it can remove barriers that drive housing prices even higher than they need to be. Minimum lot size and minimum house size requirements are two of the main culprits. Artificially low multi-family densities are another, and narrow definitions of allowable housing types are a third.
- The simple fact is that economic pressures are going to force many American households into smaller single-family units and sometimes into multi-family housing even if they would prefer to buy something larger.
- Responsible cities will find ways and places where that can happen and will revise their zoning to allow it to happen in ways that strengthen the community. Local governments can also remove barriers to modern modular homes, co-housing, live-work products, cottage housing, and a variety of innovative smaller home options emerging to serve our aging population. Other innovative products are described in more detail in A Better Way to Zone. These are not just “quick fixes” — they can result in long-term changes in the American housing stock that responds to changing economic realities.
- The long-term housing affordability crisis is not going away, and responsible local government will use this “breather” from development pressure to rethink their approach to the issue and to re-evaluate the housing barriers embedded in their zoning and subdivision controls.

01 Aug 08

The Bellows » NIMBYism

Ryan Avent argues a perspective against NIMBYism here, which never occurred to me before: that "the biggest problem with public involvement and development is that some of the biggest beneficiaries of new development have no seat at the table–those who’ll be living at to-be-constructed residences. Even if you bring all neighborhood stakeholders in, educate them, and get their opinion (eliminating squeaky wheel bias), you’re still not getting the views of all interested parties." He continues as follows:

"However the planning process addresses public participation, policy should begin with a pro-density bias to reflect that fact that other things equal, developments will always be less dense than is socially optimal. That’s because the people who would like to be residents of an area but aren’t benefit from development but have no political say in the matter."

Got that? In ciites, you should plan for optimal density (because that's ecologically efficient, too), but the NIMBYs will argue against density, and they will make those who want to move into the neighbourhood pay the additional cost of keeping density *below* optimal levels. As Avent puts it, "we need to determine whether the burden is on current homeowners to pay for the right to exclude additional residents, or if the burden is on non-residents to pay for the right to live there. Current policy is de facto the latter."

www.ryanavent.com/blog - Preview

nimbyism urban_development density affordability the_bellows ryan_avent

the biggest problem with public involvement and development is that some of the biggest beneficiaries of new development have no seat at the table–those who’ll be living at to-be-constructed residences.
policy should begin with a pro-density bias to reflect that fact that other things equal, developments will always be less dense than is socially optimal.
2 more annotations...
- Another way of looking at this is by asking who has the right to restrict entry to a neighborhood, and how far does that right extend. When thinking about theoretical negotiations over the terms of development, we need to determine whether the burden is on current homeowners to pay for the right to exclude additional residents, or if the burden is on non-residents to pay for the right to live there. Current policy is de facto the latter.
- But the current system is hugely inefficient, because we’re not even trying to figure out who the actual losers are, what a reasonable estimation of their losses is, what the social gains are, and so on. As such, you have projects which might potentially generate huge social benefits and considerable private benefits–to neighborhood residents, as well–derailed because a handful of very loud people shout loudly. And this costs those loud people only the time to organize and shout.
  - Oh god, how true! We see this time & time again with community associations "representing" the neighbourhoods here in Victoria. - on 2008-08-01
  Add Sticky Note

22 May 08

Paul Krugman Joins Team Density | hugeasscity

danb comments on Paul Krugman's recent NYT column, which he wrote while in a Berlin mid-rise/ low-rise neigjborhood. I posted a comment back about amenities, and whether it's possible to create architecture w/ amenities when you're building on small (10K) city lots and trying to stick to low-rise (or low mid-rise at best). File under "commentary."

noisetank.com/...aul-krugman-joins-team-density - Preview

hugeasscity density seattle paul_krugman james_kunstler commentary low_rise mid_rise high_rise

to achieve viable densities in Seattle with midrise we’d have to take out a whole lot of single family, which isn’t likely to happen any time soon

28 Apr 08

New Urbanists Point the Way Forward by Catesby Leigh, City Journal 18 April 2008

"The New Urbanism and suburban sprawl have something in common: they’re uncool. New Urbanism is uncool because it is basically traditional; modernism is still the thing in architecture, notes Andrés Duany, the most influential New Urbanist."

For some reason, City Journal is impossible to annotate (neither highlights and consequently "stickies" work), which is too bad. Some good ideas in this article, but I can't mark it up.

www.city-journal.org/...bc0418cl.html - Preview

urbanism new_urbanism suburbia sprawl smartgrowth density modernism architecture style city_journal

Perhaps the New Urbanists should cherish their outsider status. A gifted crew of architects and planners, they have changed the conversation about urban planning in the United States. They reject conventional postwar developers’ essentially quantitative, two-dimensional, single-use-oriented blueprints for residential subdivisions and office parks in favor of a qualitative, three-dimensional, mixed-use approach to designing neighborhoods and towns that generally involves reliance on traditional architectural styles.
To make the most of these changing public preferences, the New Urbanists need to focus on a vision that supports the resurgence of an architectural culture—which is precisely what we haven’t got now.
1 more annotations...
- A gifted crew of architects and planners, they have changed the conversation about urban planning in the United States. They reject conventional postwar developers’ essentially quantitative, two-dimensional, single-use-oriented blueprints for residential subdivisions and office parks in favor of a qualitative, three-dimensional, mixed-use approach to designing neighborhoods and towns that generally involves reliance on traditional architectural styles.

14 Apr 08

"Don't be dense" by Zev Yaroslavsky - Los Angeles Times

"The debate about the availability of housing in Los Angeles and the city's development policies has been testy but long overdue." An interesting article by Yaroslavsky that initially makes the reader think that he's advocating a sort of nimby-istic "pulling up the drawbridges" mentality, but if the reader perserveres to read the entire piece, it seems his suggestions are really LA-specific. They're not necessarily in conflict with infill development; development around transit routes & hubs; and creation of density in areas that really need it (in our case, downtown). He does bring in late 80s experiences, however, which make you wonder if things haven't irrevocably moved beyond thel contexts he's referencing.

www.latimes.com/...oslavsky13apr13,0,544304.story - Preview

urbanplanning urban_design density los_angeles neighbourhoods nimbyism smartgrowth eco_density affordable_housing

The debate about the availability of housing in Los Angeles and the city's development policies has been testy but long overdue.
Fueling public outrage over growth policies that would significantly increase density are well-grounded fears that, in the clash between overdevelopment and neighborhood preservation, the developers will prevail.
8 more annotations...
- Urged on by some elected officials, city planners have decided that the "smart" and "elegant" way to grow the city's housing stock is to double the allowable size of new buildings,bust through established height limits and reduce parking-space requirements -- effectively rolling back more than two decades of neighborhood-protection laws.
  
  There is nothing smart or elegant about such growth. On the contrary. It's development run amok and with an utter disregard for how it affects the livability of the city's neighborhoods. Should these efforts -- the city's version of a state law encouraging greater density; ad hoc zoning changes to double the size of residential development on commercial property to facilitate more density; widespread approval of zoning variances for parking, height and property-line setbacks -- succeed, they will irreparably harm some of our most cherished neighborhoods and diminish our traditional sense of place.
  - - at first blush, this reads like possible nimbyism, but when Y. gets into the nuts & bolts of zoning policies as they relate specifically to his place, Los Angeles, his stance can be seen as well-differentiated, modulated urbanism. However, I could see how this opening volley could become a rallying cry for change-resistant neighbourhoods and neighbours everywhere, too... - on 2008-04-14
  Add Sticky Note
- * Can more housing be built without destroying neighborhoods?
  
  Absolutely. Housing development should be encouraged on the thousands of properties throughout the city that have sufficient lot size and depth relative to surrounding neighborhoods. Such properties can accommodate well-designed, denser and even taller buildings without the collateral damage of traffic congestion, loss of privacy and other community effectsoften associated with such development. In some cases, these projects would even enhance commercial thoroughfares -- such as the Figueroa corridor near USC -- that are in desperate need of revitalization. At short, larger housing projects should be built where they fit.
- * Where can this housing be built?
  
  It belongs in the city's many employment and residential centers -- downtown, Hollywood, Wilshire Center, Harbor Gateway, Warner Center and the Van Nuys Civic Center. These and similar areas can absorb more housing under current zoning laws. In Century City, for instance, developers are converting traffic-generating commercial buildings to residential uses, resulting in more housing and a net reduction in peak-hour traffic.
- Housing should also be built around subway, bus and light-rail stations. Many of these transit stops -- Warner Center, where the Orange Line busway ends in Woodland Hills, is one -- are already employment magnets, and they would be appropriate sites for additional housing as well. But it makes no sense to reflexively boost residential density and building size along every Metro Rapid bus route, as the city's version of the state's density-bonus law allows, when the streets that the buses travel often cross low-density, pedestrian-friendly commercial districts serving some of the city's most charming neighborhoods. The city should be guided by one principle: The scale of development should be informed by the character of its surrounding neighborhood. The one-size-fits-all approach embodied in the density-bonus law and the indiscriminate approval of denser residential housing on commercial property is not an appropriate growth strategy for Los Angeles.
  - "The scale of development should be guided... informed by the character of its surrounding neighborhood." --> well, that's *tricky* insofar as it can result in a drawbridge or stand-off. At what point do you say, "the character has to change"? And at what point do you say, "the character *deserves* protection"? Why should it? Who determines that? - on 2008-04-14
  Add Sticky Note
- * What can the city do to provide more affordable housing?
  
  It can require developers as a matter of city policy to set aside a certain percentage of units in new buildings for people with low-to-moderate incomes. L.A. doesn't need to offer development bonuses allowing taller and bigger buildings to achieve this.
  - ? really - on 2008-04-14
  Add Sticky Note
- The city also owns a considerable amount of underutilized real estate on which affordable housing could be built. As a council member, I pioneered the creation of several housing developments above city-owned parking lots that were 100% affordable, a policy that should be applied more widely. The county has also made surplus property available to nonprofit developers to build affordable family and senior housing. The office building formerly housing the Department of Public Social Services, at Pico Boulevard and Veteran Avenue in West Los Angeles, is one example.
- It's noteworthy that a major contributing factor to the loss of our affordable housing stock is the demolition and conversion of apartments to make way for condominiums and other luxury housing. Accommodating renters displaced by such developments must be one of the city's top housing priorities.
- The burgeoning neighborhood rebellion we are witnessing throughout the city is the predictable consequence of an increasingly insular and exclusionary planning process.
  - It could also be the result of a vociferous resistance to change. - on 2008-04-14
  Add Sticky Note

23 Oct 07

Crosscut Seattle - Vancouver is Shangri-not

www.crosscut.com/...Vancouver+is+Shangri-not - Preview

density knute_berger reference skyscrapers vancouver

Yule Heibel's Library tagged density → View Popular

Forget Curbing Suburban Sprawl (MIT Technology Review)

Party Animals: Early Human Culture Thrived in Crowds | LiveScience

High population density triggers cultural explosions

Creative Class » Blog Archive » Design and the Crisis - Creative Class

The economic impact of high density development and tall buildings in central business districts: British Property Federation

The Housing Affordability Problem Has Not Gone Away

The Bellows » NIMBYism

Paul Krugman Joins Team Density | hugeasscity

New Urbanists Point the Way Forward by Catesby Leigh, City Journal 18 April 2008

"Don't be dense" by Zev Yaroslavsky - Los Angeles Times

Crosscut Seattle - Vancouver is Shangri-not

Selected Tags

Related Tags

Sponsored Links

Top Contributors

Groups interested in density

Remembrance

English 102 - Fall 2008

Wellness

Physics

Open Source Knowledge base