Given the Chicago region's growth projections over the next 30 years, determining how and where it is appropriate to increase density will become a central planning issue.
The Chicago region is expected to
grow by 1.6 to 1.8 million people in the next 30 years.
The City of Chicago predicts a 65
percent increase of residents in the downtown area alone by 2020.
These new residents must live somewhere,
yet with them come more traffic, longer commute times and loss of open space
from uncoordinated development pushing further out into our region.
An alternative to this scenario
is to increase density in existing
suggesting an increase in residential density
almost always guarantees a big, angry crowd at a public meeting.
Density often causes thorny conflict in
communities, regardless of whether the proposed development is a small townhouse
expansion in the suburbs or a 20-story high rise in downtown Chicago.
While planners and public officials face
community backlash over density issues daily, they have not discovered a way to
mitigate these conflicts in their communities.
Given the projected increase in
population for our region, solving our perennial density conflicts will be
On April 15, 2003, MPC co-sponsored a panel
discussion with the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Urban Planning
and Public Affairs (CUPPA) exploring the challenges in analyzing density
empirically and discussing density with the public.
MPC’s Vice President of External
Relations, Peter Skosey, prepared the crowd for more questions than answers to
the density conundrum.
density is difficult because measurements are rarely consistent across the
planning field, he said, while to the public, numbers mean little.
While increasing density can create
compact, efficient development that supports local economies, most people
picture a slum when they hear the word density.
CUPPA students Heather Donoghue, Cindy Hallin,
Roseann O’Laughlin, Rita Walters and Audrey Wennink presented findings of a
semester long study of density.
Hallin said that planners trying to quantify density use so many
variations in methodology that they complicate their own abilities to make
policy decisions, as studies are not comparable with one another.
Walters analyzed one common myth about
high-density development: namely, that it increases crime.
She showed several community areas in
Chicago at varying densities and income levels, then correlated them with crime
The Lakeview community, for
example, which has a gross density of 48 dwelling units per acre and an income
of $46,645/year, has a relatively low crime rate of .62 crimes per capita.
However, so does Edgewater, the
densest Chicago community, at 55 dwelling units per acre and a relatively low
income of $23,504/year.
crime rate is a low .42 crimes per capita.
Clearly, the numbers do not support the myth that density increases
Wennink noted that despite numerous studies,
the data is inconclusive when linking density to transportation.
Most studies try to show that higher
density lowers vehicle miles traveled, but they do not control for income, speed
of travel, location, land use or neighborhood choice, calling their results into
Increasing density alone
does not reduce auto trips. The Federal Transit Administration claims that
linking land use with mixed use development, higher densities, suitable
jobs/housing balance and effective parking management strategies could lower the
total number of auto trips by 18 percent.
O’Laughlin presented data on infrastructure costs and
environmental degradation as a result of sprawl, and made the case for
approaching problems like air and water quality on a regional level.
“Water pollution does not respect
political boundaries,” she stated.
She summed up the students’ presentation by saying that policy makers
should understand that density is more than a mathematical definition.
It is a complex set of perceptions about
the social and built environment.
Carolee Kokola, planner/urban designer for
Farr Associates, went a step further.
“Leave the numbers out of it when talking to
a community about density,” she advised.
Using pictures instead of numbers facilitates a discussion of density in
uses a visual preference survey and pictures of developments at various levels
of density, and asks residents to give each picture a score.
Farr then tallies the scores and reports
back to the community with the highest rated photographs.
Kokola warned that the scores themselves
mean little without including comments people made about each picture.
Otherwise, it is difficult to determine
what people are responding to, Kokola said.
Farr usually gives participants some
parameters to use when evaluating pictures, in terms of looking for pedestrian
character, building facades and building types.
She noted that the study is
quasi-scientific — part survey, part focus group.
And while it cannot provide conclusive
data about community preferences, it begins an input and discussion
“There is one major
caveat, preferences don’t mean buy in,” Kokola said.
Ben Ranney, director of
development for Prairie Holding Corporation offered advice for how to achieve
community buy-in from a developer’s perspective:
- Know your community: identify stakeholders, work
closely with municipal staff and communicate with elected officials.
- Know the issues in the community: property tax
issues, overcrowding in schools, neighborhood character, etc.
- Listen: Every community has a vision of itself.
- Communicate: seek input from third parties —
architects, planners and consultants. Encourage local residents to be
advocates for you.
- A developer’s word will always be suspect: be
cautious about sharing information. Don’t respond to every accusation and be
careful about using e-mail to communicate, as it can be tampered with.
- Be flexible: Leave room for adaptation in your plans:
expect to add amenities, different uses or lower density as a result of
negotiations with the community.
sure your budget can accommodate some change and still make the project
The three presentations only
served to reinforce the difficult nature of dealing with urban density. As MPC
continues to focus on density, check back for helpful tools, methods and
resources to thoughtfully encourage density and redevelopment.