OpEd Piece – 9/2/08 by Ken Shelin
Several months ago, the Herald Tribune started a public discussion of the issue of higher density in land development. This issue is usually controversial in Sarasota. And it is clear that there are some beliefs about the topic that have achieved the status of conventional wisdom, but are actually myths.
A coalition including the National Multi Housing Council, the Sierra Club, the American Institute of Architects and the Urban Land Institute have taken the issue on squarely and have jointly published a booklet entitled Higher-Density Development, Myth and Fact. Eight myths that indicate only negative consequences of higher density are examined at length in light of many recent studies that document the errors of those myths.
Myth 1 – High density overburdens infrastructure. The fact is that compact development cuts the cost of roadways, water lines, electrical lines, sewer systems, police and fire protection, trash removal, mail collection and distribution and other services because less is needed.
Myth 2 – Higher density lowers property values. Studies show no discernible difference in property values. In fact, in the City of Sarasota, the highest property values are usually in the areas with the highest zoning densities.
Myth 3 – Higher density creates more traffic congestion. It actually reduces traffic congestion because there are more opportunities for hiking, walking and bike riding. It also stimulates public transit development and use.
Myth 4 – Higher density leads to higher crime rates. Higher density increases foot traffic and puts more eyes on the street which reduces opportunities for crime.
Myth 5 – Higher density is more environmentally destructive. Just the opposite is true because low density gobbles up land through large lot zoning destroying the very thing people want to protect, natural areas and farmland.
Myth 6 – Higher density is unattractive and doesn’t fit in a low density community. – Mixed use, architectural variation and mixed income housing has proven wildly popular all over the US where it has been created in recent years. Low density isolates residents from shops, offices, retail and their neighbors.
Myth 7 – No one in suburban areas wants higher density. – Our demographics are changing and many households now prefer higher density even in the suburbs. People want a more convenient and vibrant lifestyle and single person households now outnumber married couple with children households.
Myth 8 – Higher density is only for lower income households. – Multi-family housing has historically been the housing of choice for the wealthiest individuals because of its convenience. See Myth 2 above.
A low density suburban type lifestyle is not a sustainable one because it encourages sprawl, increases infrastructure needs and costs, increases our carbon footprint, creates more pollution, discourages the healthful benefits of walking, hiking and bike riding encouraged by walkable cities, destroys our natural resources and wildlife habitat and increases the social disconnectedness of our general population which our country has experienced since the 1950s.
John Ringling’s vision for Sarasota was a cosmopolitan city. This city is infused with a different spirit because of him and the interesting, highly qualified and gifted people that have been attracted to his ideal. If we are to face the future growth that we know is coming, including a projected possible doubling of our population by 2020, we need to change our land development model from the old model existing in our city of barriers to people, separation of uses and low population density. After all, isn’t it people, as well as our natural environment that create an attractive place to live and work.
Posted by kenshelin 
