King amongst men

John King has recently written some amazing articles that he really deserves a tip o’ the hat, highlights from the first, which was a small portion in a larger article about about San Francisco’s Union Square:

…bird’s-eye view is used to full advantage in “Visualizing Density,” a new book by Julie Campoli and Alex MacLean published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. More than 1,000 photos are marshaled to make one sharp point: The issue isn’t how many units are placed onto an acre of land but rather the look and feel of how this is done.

The key to creating new, high-quality density lies in how we plan and design communities,” they write. “What really matters is how the streets are laid out, how the land is subdivided, how the buildings are arranged and detailed, whether trees are planted, and where the sidewalks lead.”

But the text is beside the point: The pictures tell the story. They’re colorful and concise, like Rorschach tests on the sort of community in which you’d like to live. They includes aerial shots of landscapes lined up by the number of residential units per acre — letting readers see, for instance, that an abstract number such as 13 units to the acre can translate to either formless pods of townhomes in a Sun City project, or an attractive snippet of our own Russian Hill.

There are dozens of Bay Area examples, not all of them objects of pride, so be warned: Just when you’re chuckling with condescension at the monotonous tracts of Las Vegas, there’s a sheared hilltop in Castro Valley now devoted to tanklike “estates.”

Or consider the contrasting view of a young condo complex in Walnut Creek and an old neighborhood in New Orleans. Each is the same density, roughly 40 housing units per acre. Trust me: If you could parachute into just one of those pictures, you’d be ordering gumbo for lunch.

By the by, “Visualizing Density” is not available through the Alameda Library, anyone want to purchase a copy and donate it to the library?  Highlights from the abstract of the book:

The American Dream of a single-family home on its own expanse of yard still captures the imagination. But with 100 million more people expected in the United States by 2050, rising energy and transportation costs, disappearing farmland and open space, and the clear need for greater energy efficiency and reduced global warming emissions, the future built environment must include more density.Consumer demand for more walkable, mixed-use, and concentrated neighborhoods is already on the rise among some demographic groups—the 70 million retiring baby boomers, for example, and young professionals seeking transit-oriented development for shorter commutes. But for others, density continues to have negative connotations. In many established urban neighborhoods, concerns about traffic congestion and parking, and strains on infrastructure, schools, and parks have led to resistance to more concentrated settlement patterns.…Visualizing Density includes an essay on the density challenge facing the United States, an illustrated manual on planning and designing for “good” density, and a catalog of more than 250 diverse neighborhoods across the country, noting density in housing units per acre for each site. Four photographs of each location are included—close-up, context, neighborhood, and plan views—to provide an impartial and comparative view of the many ways to design neighborhoods.…

For many Americans density is associated with ugliness, crowding, and congestion, even though it can be shown that, when properly planned and designed, higher density can save land, energy, and dollars. Moreover, many people have difficulty estimating density from visual cues or distinguishing quantitative (measured) and qualitative (perceived) density. We tend to overestimate the density of monotonous, amenity-poor developments and underestimate the density of well-designed, attractive projects, thereby reinforcing the negative stereotypes. A primary objective of this work is to correct these misperceptions. As Campoli stated at the Massachusetts Smart Growth Conference in Worcester, Massachusetts in December, “We don’t have a density problem. We have a design problem.” [emphasis added]

In addition to offering this book, the Lincoln Insistute of Land Policy has also created a companion website on Visualizing Density.  Before I dive into that, some information about the LILP in case someone mistrusts the LILP as a “biased” source, info about them:

The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a nonprofit and tax-exempt educational institution founded in 1974 to improve the quality of public debate and decisions in the areas of land policy and land-related taxation. The Institute’s goals are to integrate theory and practice to better shape land policy and to provide a nonpartisan forum for discussion of the multidisciplinary forces that influence public policy. Inspired by the work of Henry George as expressed in the book Progress and Poverty (1879), the Lincoln Institute introduces his thinking and ideas into the contemporary land and tax policy debate to advance a more equitable and productive society.

A link to their Board of Directors. Going back to the companion website, you do need to register to access the information on the site, but take the Density quiz, it’s really quite eyeopening.  And the Bird’s Eye View qives a snap shot into varying levels of density.  Also, in the Bird’s Eye View slides, it explains how to measure neighborhood density, which might be an interesting project to incorporate with Google Maps new tool.  According to these researchers, defining what the density in an area is not that simple:

What is the density of the street you live on? The answer is not any one number but several, depending on how you measure density and how broad an area you include in your calculation. Density can be expressed in different ways-persons per square mile, units per acre, or floor area ratio. Residential density is typically expressed in housing units per acre and measured as net or gross. Commercial or mixed-use density is more accurately expressed as a floor area ratio. The density of your “street” will depend on how you define the boundaries. Does it include the apartment building on the other side of the block? If so, the number will bump up. Are you including park on the next block? The number will drop.

Since this is already getting way too long, I’ll discuss the two other John King articles tomorrow on Instant Urbanism.