DramatisPersonae.org Online Survey of
Community Attitudes to Densification and Intensification of Existing Neigborhoods

Discussion

Many people feel that higher urban densities in their immediate neighborhoods can cause their property values to fall. There is a real fear that by adding denser forms of housing such as townhomes, row houses, duplexes, granny flats, apartments, co-ops, group homes and condominiums to an established neighborhood-that property values for nearby residences will fall.
At the same time, considerable pressure is being exerted by environmental groups, architects, real estate developers, municipal officials, and others to densify existing urban areas to make better use of in situ infrastructure, public transit and to make cities more interesting and diverse places to live and work.

Complicating this debate is the neo-urbanist agenda that promotes adding certain commercial uses to residential areas-work-at-home, cottage industry, corner stores, local pubs, small office buildings, loft apartments that double as home and work space and such. This adds a second question to the mix-does adding limited commercial uses to an existing residential area, essentially intensifying it, increase or decrease property values in the immediate neighborhood?

The questions therefore are twofold:

1. Does densification increase or decrease property values all else being equal*-for the individual property owner undergoing densification and for the immediate neighborhood?
2. Does intensification (adding limited commercial uses) increase or decrease property values all else being equal*-again, there are two dimensions to this question relating to the individual property owner and the immediate neighborhood?

(* The underlying assumption must be that property values can be normalized for such variables as social order. The Broken Windows Syndrome suggests that any negative change in social order brings about a negative change in property values. Hence, if densification or intensification has an impact on social order (in the form of petty crime, major crime, graffiti, vandalism, homelessness and so forth) then this is an important variable to control for.)

The fierce, often emotional debate between neo-urbanists and their allies on one side and many community association members and activists on the other is proceeding with an astonishing lack of data to justify any type of rational discussion. Perhaps part of the solution to this debate is to provide both parties with an analysis that either proves or disproves the thesis questions.

In the event that neighboring property values can be shown to remain unchanged or even increase with either densification or intensification then there is less argument to make against either and neo-urbanists, architects, town planners, municipal officials and others can proceed in the remaking of North American towns and cities with less opposition from sitting owners.

In the event that the opposite holds true, novel solutions must be sought to reduce the potential conflict in the Industry.

Purpose of This Research

Before answering these questions by studying the data, we are also seeking to study the reaction of existing communities to the 'threat' of new development in their areas-development that either results in an increase in density of the existing urban fabric or an increase in the intensity of uses in an existing neighborhood.

Existing residents have often been accused of reacting irrationally to new development-of exhibiting NIMBY behaviors-a Not in My Backyard backlash against any new proposed development.

Take some time to answer our online survey if you have a story or know of an incident you wish to relate demonstrating the reaction of an existing community to a proposed development.

Can you tell us about incidents where the Community reaction has been shown to be beneficial-where the project improved because of community input?

Or do you know of a situation where irrational community reaction delayed or caused a worthwhile project to be cancelled?
Tell us your story ….

(Please note: your online surveys results may be published. By pressing the submit button at the end of this survey, you are agreeing to its potential publication. You should also know that you may select 'anonymity' at the end of your survey, in which case names, dates and places will be changed to protect the identity of the participants and the respondent-you.)

Online Survey

Questions for Global Survey of Community Attitudes to Densification and Intensification of Existing Neighborhoods

1. Where did this incident take place: city/country
2. When did the incident occur: year
3. Who was the proponent of the development: developer/architect
4. Describe the proponents:
5. Who were the opponents of this development: community activists/nimby'ites/environmentalists/competitors/neighbors/others (please specify)
6. Describe the opponents:
7. What type of development was being proposed: residential/commercial/industrial/mixed use/other (please specify)
8. Give more detail about the proposed development:
9. Were you in favor or opposed to the development: in favor/opposed
10. What arguments did the proponents of the development put forward in favor of the proposal:
11. What arguments against the proposal were put forward:
12. Was legal counsel involved for the proponents: yes/no
13. Was legal counsel involved for the opponents: yes/no
14. Did the two sides sit down to try to work things out: yes/no
15. Describe what happened at any such meetings:
16. Did the proposal come before Municipal Council: yes/no
17. Describe what happened at the Council meeting:
18. Was the proposal approved or rejected by Council: approved/rejected
19. If it was approved, what reasons did they cite:
20. If it was rejected, what reasons did they give for rejecting it:
21. If it was approved, did the opponents appeal: yes/no
22. If they appealed, where did they appeal it to: a municipal review body of some type (please describe)/a court of law/higher level of government
23. Were the opponents successful on appeal: yes, they stopped the project/no, the project went ahead anyway
24. If the project was rejected, did the proponent appeal: yes/no
25. If they appealed, where did they appeal it to: a municipal review body of some type (please describe)/a court of law/higher level of government
26. Was the proponent successful on appeal: yes, the project was allowed to go ahead/no, the decision to stop the project was confirmed
27. At the end of the day, was the project delayed: yes/no
28. If so, by how long: months
29. Was the project cancelled: yes/no
30. If it was cancelled, was it due to delay: yes/no
31. Were there other reasons for cancellation:
32. What do you estimate the proponents spent (in USD) in preparing and submitting their project through all phases up to (but not including) construction for architects fees, legal fees, engineering fees and fees for other experts and professional: $ USD
33. What do you estimate the opponents spent (in USD) in opposing the project: $ USD
34. Was there any violent behavior by any of the parties: yes/no
35. By the proponent: yes/no (please describe)
36. By the opponents: yes/no (please describe)
37. Was there any vandalism or threats made: yes/no
38. By the proponent: yes/no (please describe)
39. By the opponents: yes/no (please describe)
40. Did the proponent use the Internet to make their case for the project: yes/no (explain how)
41. Did the opponents use the Internet to make their case against the project: yes/no (explain how)
42. Did the opponents start a petition: yes/no
43. How many signatures did they obtain:
44. Tell us more about the tactics of the proponent:
45. Tell us more about the tactics of the opponents:
46. Did the opponents use the media to attack the project: yes/no
47. If yes, explain their media strategy:
48. Did the proponent use the media to favor the project: yes/no
49. If yes, explain their media strategy:
50. Do you think the process can be improved: yes/no
51. If yes, how:
52. Do you think community involvement improved this project: yes/no
53. If yes, how:
54. Do you think that the Municipal Council acted wisely in this matter or not, explain your view:
55. Do you think that the Municipal Review Board (if any) acted wisely or not in this matter, explain your view:
56. Are there any other factors you would like to bring to our attention, please elaborate:
57. I wish to remain anonymous: yes*/no
Your Name:
Your Position:
Your Company or Organization:
Your Telephone Number:
Your Email:

(*If you indicate 'yes' here, then all place names, dates, proponent names and opponent names will be changed as well.)

Thank you for participating in this study.

DramatisPersonae.org Home Page