Densification Project Research Articles

Making room for affordable housing: Project-based negotiations between planning authorities and landowners in Dutch and Swiss densification

The emerging objective to combat urban sprawl has put densification on the political agenda. Simultaneously, the complexity of planning within the existing built environment means that planning increasingly occurs on the project level. Project-based negotiations between planning authorities and landowners, in which agreements between parties are formalized in negotiated land use plans or private law contracts, thus shape the outcomes of densification projects. Considering the potential adverse effects of densification on housing affordability, it is important to understand how this shift towards project-based negotiations affects the ability of planners to secure public benefits such as affordable housing in redevelopment projects. This study uses a neo-institutional framework to analyze the negotiations between landowners and planning authorities and illuminates under which conditions affordable housing is provided. Case studies of six projects in two larger-scale redevelopment areas in the cities of Bern (Switzerland) and Nieuwegein (Netherlands) show this ability is highly dependent on (1) the existence of binding affordable housing targets, (2) landownership by non-profit actors, and (3) the direct involvement of citizens. The cases show a distinction between different types of project negotiations. In the Netherlands, contract-based negotiations can lead to the dilution of affordability targets, while in Switzerland, these targets are implemented more consistently through negotiated land use plans. The findings indicate that a project-based approach to planning may speed up the implementation of densification objectives but comes at the cost of democratic accountability. Instead, to ensure the social sustainability of urban densification projects, the scope of negotiations between planners and developers needs to move beyond cost-benefit considerations to include a broader range of public interests.

“In densification we trust” – on the role of abstract space in the production of urban densification in the Alpine Rhine Valley

ABSTRACT This paper draws on Henri Lefebvre’s conception of abstract space to analyze how socio-territorial relations between a variety of public and private actors shape the transformation of the built environment of the Alpine Rhine Valley in western Austria through urban densification. First, the paper conceptualizes abstract space through the duality of land, which is both traded as a market commodity and regulated by the various layers of the state. Lefebvre’s concept is further refined by making it volumetric, in order to analyze how conceptualizations of urban density are the site of negotiations and trade-offs that irrationalize the rational nature of abstract space. Six socio-territorial relations were identified during typical phases of land acquisition and project development, derived from the empirical material resulting from 20 interviews with key stakeholders. The paper thus demonstrates how socio-territorial relations are essential for the conceptualization of urban densification projects, as well as how volumetric abstract space can contribute to de-naturalizing our understanding of the transformation of the built environment.

Commoning the compact city: The role of old and new commons in urban development

Although densification is generally seen to contribute to more sustainable urban development, it is often linked to market-oriented and for-profit development, contributing to the enclosure of urban space. We analyse how densification can take a different path through processes of commoning. We particularly aim to understand how commoning initiatives can contribute to new institutional arrangements that counteract enclosure and commodification in densification. We furthermore aim to contribute to conceptual clarity in the debate on urban commons by emphasizing the different roles of so-called ‘old’ and ‘new’ commons in urban development. Our analytical framework builds on a new institutionalist approach which stresses the analysis of localized and temporary institutional arrangements negotiated among actors in a given situation. We rely on a detailed case-study of a densification project in the city of Bern (Switzerland), where publicly-owned land was redeveloped into cooperative housing and urban green space. Our findings show how densification leads to a transition phase in which institutional arrangements defining land uses and allocating access and use rights are renegotiated. These are crucial moments where processes of commoning can shape the outcome of densification, although not independently from the supportive action of the public actor. We underline the potential of new commons, even when typically transitional, unstable, and temporary. Contrary to old commons, their potential lies not so much in the ability for long-lasting resource management, but rather in the capacity to change the conditions of governance during the transition between land uses, advancing more socially-sustainable outcomes in a key moment of the urban redevelopment process.

Exploring ‘good practice’ densification projects: the impact of green space and density on local acceptance

ABSTRACT While the ‘compact city’ can provide environmental benefits, densification can result in negative trade-offs at the local scale – e.g. through increases in density and the removal of urban green space – and densification projects are often rejected by locals. This paper explores examples of densification in a compact European city, integrating different stakeholder perspectives from planners as well as neighbours of densification projects. Neighbours do not reject densification per se, but evaluate the individual projects and their contexts. Evaluation depended mostly on how the projects impacted urban green space, social mix and available parking spaces. Implications are discussed and ‘good practice’ criteria that could reduce the trade-offs of densification are suggested.

An Assessment of urban greening challenges and opportunities associated with urban densification in the EThekwini Municipality

ABSTRACT It is critical that urban densification is accepted as a planning strategy for enhanced, sustainable urban development, especially considering the compacting of urban areas, integrated land uses, reduced land take and the need to conserve urban green spaces. Nevertheless, its implementation has challenged the management of urban green spaces. Densification has created a dilemma in planning as planners battle to provide better green spaces, while simultaneously implementing urban densification projects. This study explores the persistent challenges and opportunities of urban densification in intermediate African cities, using a case study of Umhlanga in the eThekwini Municipality in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The study used a mixed method approach, using questionnaires, unstructured interviews and field observations. The results indicated that urban growth in intermediate towns is dominated by horizontal expansion, despite introducing urban densification policies, which has proved detrimental to ecological conservation. Furthermore, embarking on growth that integrates various land uses is increasingly enhancing those towns’ resilience and slowing down urban sprawl. This study shows that transformation in urban planning is essential in integrating ecological conservation in densification projects. Urban densification should not be treated in isolation but involve multiple city stakeholders in several city departments to achieve a broad range of goals.

For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands

While governments worldwide rely upon compact city policies to reduce land consumption from urban growth, recent studies have addressed the potential trade-off between densification and housing affordability. Concerns have been voiced that densification leads to a one-sided housing supply, structurally excluding low-income households. However, few studies address household income variation across densification projects, leaving us with a limited understanding of the circumstances under which exclusion occurs. To this end, we explore household incomes in densification projects between 2012 and 2020 in the Province of Utrecht, the Netherlands, where urban development is traditionally strongly regulated through active land policy. At the same time, current shifts towards a more deregulated housing market make for an interesting case. Exceptional access to detailed cadastral and census data allows us to identify densification projects and assign them a median household income each. We investigate the influence of location and transformation process on household incomes through regression analysis and conduct qualitative case studies of projects whose median income was highly mispredicted by the regression model. This allows us to integrate non-quantified factors, such as land ownership and public policy interventions, in explaining such interesting cases. For the Province of Utrecht, our study confirms that while households in densification projects earn significantly more than their neighbours, the range of incomes in densification projects is large. Project characteristics such as centrality, neighbourhood status and transformation process explain only a small share of this variance. For cases where median incomes are much lower than predicted by the model, public land ownership, in combination with inclusionary zoning, is essential in ensuring housing affordability. Our approach highlights the necessity of supplementing densification policies with measures that secure affordable housing.

Cooperative planning under pro-development urban agenda? A collage of densification practices in Zurich, Switzerland

Like in many cities and regions worldwide, densification is the current urban development paradigm in Switzerland. Although considered one of the main policy mechanisms for sustainable land use, densification strategies are mainly employed by the private sector, causing adverse social effects. Additionally, profit-oriented urban planning challenges the traditionally exercised norm of cooperative planning. By analysing multiple case studies of densification projects in Zurich, this paper elucidates the nature of cooperation in contemporary urban planning: Is cooperation perceived as genuine inclusion of the weaker parties, or is it dominated by the negotiations between the powerful ones? To address such questions, we examine the main cooperative mechanisms and bottlenecks to achieve effective cooperation; the dominant alliances in planning; and the ways these actors identify compromises. The research reveals an elite-driven and pro-development collaboration approach among public authorities, landowners, and developers with minor integration of less powerful actors, despite the continuous effort to advance (formal and informal) planning instruments to secure social inclusion. Consequently, the study offers some directions for refining contemporary Zurich's mainstream planning approach to address the challenges posed by the neoliberal discourse and practice, hence, being relevant for similar socio-spatial settings confronting a pro-development urban agenda.

A Residential Area at the Gates of the City: Controversies Surrounding “Quality of Life”

This article looks at the different meanings of the argument for “quality of life” used in support of an urban densification project in Geneva destined for a suburban area located at the gates of the city. It sheds light on the different values that underline this argument and stresses the dangers of using the term “quality of life” in the promotion of inclusive and sustainable cities to justify socially burdensome choices framed by both ecological and rationalist debates without taking into sufficient account the underlying social realities and concerns of the different parties involved. This article analyzes the controversies surrounding an urban densification project, showing how they refer to differentiated visions of “quality of life,” more or less socially and morally legitimized.

The politics of urban densification in Oslo

Urban density is central to pressing questions concerning low-carbon lifestyles, affordable housing and global land use patterns. However, for many densifying cities, problems of inequality, climate emissions and social sustainability often remain unsolved or exaggerated. Adopting a relational perspective, this paper explores the politics of urban densification in Oslo, Norway. Arguing that urban density is assembled as particular political projects, the paper seeks to understand the achievements urban densification projects bring together, from housing policy to environmental policy, property schemes and financial strategies. Based on a qualitative study of urban densification strategies and projects in Oslo, the paper develops a typology of hegemonic and counterhegemonic urban density discourses and contributes to a discussion of how economically, socially and environmentally different kinds of urban densities may be assembled.

Ensuring Public Access to Green Spaces in Urban Densification: The Role of Planning and Property Rights

Implementing densification while ensuring green space accessibility is a crucial planning challenge. The powerful role of private for-profit actors densification projects mean that green spaces are at risk of being co-opted by private interests and transformed into club goods. Using a new-institutionalist approach, we analyse the implementation of densification and urban greening based on two case-studies in Switzerland and the Netherlands. We ask what planning strategies are successful in ensuring public access to green spaces in private-led densification. To counteract club formation, planners need to restrict property rights, actively monitor implementation of planning objectives, and ensure an open physical design.

Planning instruments enhance the acceptance of urban densification.

Dense and compact cities yield several benefits for both the population and the environment, including the containment of urban sprawl, reduced carbon emissions, and increased housing supply. Densification of the built environment is thus a key contemporary urban planning paradigm worldwide. However, local residents often oppose urban densification, motivating a need to understand their underlying concerns. In order to do so, we examined different factors driving public acceptance of housing densification projects through a combination of a conjoint survey experiment and different proximity frames among 12,402 participants across Berlin, Chicago, London, Los Angeles, New York, and Paris. Respondents compared housing densification projects with varying attributes, including their geographic proximity, project-related factors, and accompanying planning instruments. The results indicate that the acceptance of such projects decreases with project proximity and that project-related factors, such as the type of investor, usage, and climate goals, impact densification project acceptance. More specifically, we see a negative effect on acceptance levels for projects with for-profit investors and a positive effect when the suggested developments are mixed use or climate neutral. In addition, planning instruments, such as rent control, inclusionary zoning, and participatory planning, appear to positively influence acceptance. Interestingly, a cross-continental comparison shows overall higher acceptance levels of densification by US respondents. These multifaceted results allow us to better understand what drives people's acceptance of housing projects and how projects and planning processes can be designed to increase democratic acceptance of urban densification.

Planning for social sustainability: mechanisms of social exclusion in densification through large-scale redevelopment projects in Swiss cities

In many cities, there has been renewed interest over the last 30 years in densification as part of wider efforts to combat urban sprawl. In daily practice, however, densification is a contested process because of its redistributive effects. Next to potential environmental advantages, it produces both benefits and losses for different individuals and households. The redistributive effects are an expression of conflicts between environmental, economic, and social dimensions of sustainability. We show that the latter is heavily impacted: if densification projects are not designed to the needs of people who are actually supposed to benefit from it—the residents—low-income groups are at risk of social displacement. This scenario is highly unsustainable. By using a neo-institutional approach and comparative case study methodology conducted in Switzerland, we analyze the institutional rules and the involved actors’ strategies when dealing with densification projects. We explain the mechanisms leading to the loss of social qualities when competing with economic interests of investors and authorities.

Accepting and resisting densification: The importance of project-related factors and the contextualizing role of neighbourhoods

Densifying existing settlements is a top planning priority worldwide. Its main goals include protecting undeveloped land, reducing CO2 emissions, and the provision of housing. Despite a common acceptance of densification as a planning strategy, the local implementation of densification tends to provoke local opposition. Based on the analysis of a survey on densification preferences (including an adaptive conjoint experiment), this paper examines how residents assess potential densification projects in the Canton of Zurich in Switzerland. The results indicate that residents tend to accept densification in general, but not in their own neighbourhood. Residents in urban neighbourhoods are more likely to accept densification, and if they resist it, they tend to be driven by NIMBY behaviour. The higher likelihood of resistance to densification in suburban and rural contexts seems to be based on either broader anti-growth sentiments or on NIMBY behaviour. Different project characteristics (project-related factors) can explain residents’ acceptance of and resistance to densification projects, yet the neighbourhood types in which residents live moderate the impact of these project-related factors. Our findings distinguish between the preferences of residents who live in different residential neighbourhood types and can thus provide planners with a starting point from which to craft context-dependent densification projects tailored to these different neighbourhood types.

Search for identity in the process of new architectural design in changing historical city Centre of Setif, Algeria

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the involvement of the concept of city identity in the design process of urban densification and outline how can today's urban projects be able to reinforce the delicate balance between conservation, development management and sustainability objectives.Design/methodology/approachBased on case study approach, this paper focus on “Park Mall and Four Point Hotel” project, located in the historic city centre of Setif (Algeria) and takes the procedure of designing as its conceptual framework. Following this, it explores genesis document of the project and assesses architect's choices attributed to six elements of architectural language. These elements are apprehended regarding their relevance, which depends on whether the new building is or not compatible/integrated with the existing environment, and how far does it reinvent the modern vision.FindingsThe paper provides empirical insight about how the concept of identity is used during the design process of densification project. It argues that this latter consists on a dynamic process shaped by cultural, socioeconomic and institutional specificities applying local/global design precedents, multifunctionality concept and novel features in a tourism-oriented mindset and to still maintain and improve the specific identity of the city centre, thus becoming an active way to reconcile conservation, sustainability and development management objectives.Originality/valueThis paper raises discussion on how the concept of city identity could renew the field of heritage conservation and development management. Therefore, it fulfils an identified need to study how can urban projects reconcile conservation, development management and sustainability objectives.

Strategic use of land policy instruments for affordable housing – Coping with social challenges under scarce land conditions in Swiss cities

For decades, many cities have introduced densification policy objectives to stop urban sprawl or to promote efficient use of natural resources. In the urban housing sector, however, densification projects often intensify social challenges. Due to rising rents after modernization of existing housing stocks as a consequence of densification, low-income tenants are forced to leave their apartments. Risks of social exclusion and segregation increase simultaneously.In this article, we analyze how municipal planning authorities cope with affordable housing shortages in a context of urban densification. Specifically, we ask: How do municipal planning authorities promote affordable housing in densifying cities? To answer this research question, we apply a neoinstitutional analysis approach to better understand (1) the basic mechanisms of how land policy instruments impact affordability, and (2) why specific instruments are activated to defend affordable housing objectives. Through qualitative case study analysis of four Swiss urban municipalities, our results show that the mere availability of land policy instruments is not sufficient but that the strategic activation of specific instruments matters.

Negative covenants and real-estate developers’ modus operandi: the case of suburban densification in Oslo, Norway

This article presents an investigation of how developers in Oslo, Norway, relate to and deal with negative covenants in densification projects. A densification project which is permissible under th...

Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Development: The Case of Urban Densification

ABSTRACTThe concept of sustainable development continues to influence urban planning, and one of the strategies planners use to generate sustainable urban growth is the densification of urban districts. Because densification projects often take place in historic environments, however, this model might represent a challenge to the preservation of cultural heritage. With its emphasis on economic, social and environmental concerns, the popular tripartite sustainability model has achieved hegemony. This paper provides a discussion on what may be considered a fourth pillar of sustainability: cultural sustainability. By incorporating concepts from cultural economics, we will draw attention to how cultural heritage represents cultural value and can be considered alongside other sustainability concerns. The cultural value represented by heritage will be illustrated by referencing three ongoing Norwegian urban densification projects. The discussion leads to the conclusion that it is preferable in urban planning strategies to operate with a clear cultural component. This conclusion calls for adding a distinguishable fourth cultural pillar in the sustainability model.

Linking spatial characteristics to residential lifestyles

Today, in many European countries, increasing opposition tends to thwart urban densification projects. To enhance public acceptability of such projects, which are likely to promote sustainable urban development, it is essential to better anticipate urban programming based on target groups of inhabitants with different lifestyles. The purpose of this innovative, upstream interdisciplinary research is to forecast and analyse the needs of these populations in accordance with their lifestyles and subsequently propose an urban and architectural vision adapted to the lifestyles considered desirable for the site. By doing so, it addresses the often-neglected social aspects of sustainable urban development projects. This article presents an application of this approach to the strategic Waldstadt area (Bern, Switzerland). Six urban visions are compared and assessed, each offering promising leads and recommendations for the site's development. Lifestyle urban planning gives architects and planners a powerful decision-making tool for integrating social considerations into the design of sustainable neighbourhoods. It is also a concrete solution to acceptance issues and their resulting tensions.

Planning for green qualities in the densification of suburban Stockholm – opportunities and challenges

Implementing urban densification projects in planning practice while simultaneously providing sufficient green spaces has proven to be challenging. Consequently, there is an increasing need for practical approaches to urban green space management in the on-going densification of cities. Therefore, this study was designed to give a better understanding of current green space management practice in two municipalities in Stockholm, Sweden, undergoing densification. The challenges identified through interviews with municipal planners were related to site-specific conditions for densification projects, conflicting interests between involved and affected actors, green quality management issues, and limited use of impact assessment tools. In the municipalities, innovative approaches were adopted in efforts to minimize the above challenges, such as collaboration between the developers and planners, or participatory workshops with the local citizens. This paper explores these challenges and approaches, and makes further recommendations for improving green space management practice.

City-Tour München

The city and metropolitan region of Munich is facing continuing growth in employment and population. The city of Munich alone is expected to have 300 000 new inhabitants by the year 2035, and the larger planning region an additional 400 000 new inhabitants. Since the 1990s urban development in Munich – following the main city's strategy “compact, urban, green” – has focused on brownfield development, mainly former military barracks and railway yards. Today, available land within the existing land-use plan has become scarce. Consequently, the city of Munich launched the“Long-term Settlement Development” project in 2009. Their main strategies – densification, transformation of industrial land, and enlargement of land use at the city's municipal borders – were supposed to activate sites for housing as well as for highly mixed-use urban areas for the next five to 25 years. Eight years after the launch of that strategy, an intermediate assessment is due. Each one of the three strategies shows a specific combination of challenges for further urban development. First, densification takes place in existing neighborhoods, where people feel highly affected by densification projects, and NIMBY behavior seems to prevail. It is therefore crucial to organize a process of “give and take” between existing and new inhabitants, and their respective spatial demands. Second, transformation of derelict industrial sites has turned out to be a process that involves a so far unusual multitude of actors, where municipal authorities are but one voice in a concert of property owners, new companies, real estate investors, and other potential users. Within the strategy of increasing usable land in the land-use plan, the traditional public logic of managing large-scale urban projects confronts the restraints of partisan political interests and a related hesitancy in committing the city to balanced long-term development.