Hamartia Antidote
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2013
- Messages
- 35,188
- Reaction score
- 30
- Country
- Location
However, a polling firm called YouGov recently asked Americans whether they thought low-density neighborhoods were better than high-density ones. Specifically, they were asked whether low densities meant more or less congestion, more or less crime, and were better or worse for the environment. Planning advocates, of course, claim that high densities mean less congestion, are better for the environment, and have less crime because there are more “eyes on the street.”
Those density advocates apparently haven’t been able to persuade most Americans that densities are better. According to the survey, 75 percent of Americans think that low densities are better for the environment, 60 percent think low-density neighborhoods are less congested, and 62 percent think they suffer less crime. I happen to agree with the majority on all three points, but whether you agree or not, it is clear that most Americans want to live, not just in single-family homes, but in low-density neighborhoods.
The survey also asked another question: should people be free to buy land and develop it as they please or should the government limit where they can build things? A smaller majority, 55 percent, believed people should be free to develop real estate as they please. Does that mean they oppose single-family zoning? Or does it mean they oppose restrictions on rural development?
Developers learned in the 1890s that Americans would more readily buy homes if the properties they bought, and their neighbors, were deed-restricted to have nothing more than single-family homes. Zoning was developed in the early 1900s to emulate deed restrictions in single-family neighborhoods that had been built before the widespread use of deed restrictions. This gave people confidence that their neighborhood densities would remain low and, as a result, urban homeownership rates increased by 150 percent by 1930.
If zoning hadn’t been invented, all or nearly all single-family developments built since 1900 would have deed restrictions maintaining low densities. I don’t mind getting rid of zoning so long as residents can easily add deed restrictions to all of the homes in their neighborhoods. Houston allows this with a vote of 75 percent of homeowners in a neighborhood. But to abolish single-family zoning with the goal of densifying neighborhoods with apartment buildings betrays the interests and desires of the residents of those neighborhoods.
Just as it is easy to persuade voters to support transit for other people to ride so most people can drive on less congested roads, it is probably easy to persuade voters to support high-density development for other people in some other neighborhood. Demanding residents of single-family neighborhoods to accept high-density apartment buildings in their midst always faces more opposition because residents of those neighborhoods know that density means more congestion, more crime, and is bad for the environment.
Is high density worse for the environment, traffic, and crime? Most Americans think so | YouGov
In a recent poll, YouGov asked Americans to weigh in on the pros and cons of high-density living. The results show that most Americans, including most of those who live in cities, believe that high density is not only worse for the environment, but also a driver of traffic congestion and crime.
today.yougov.com
Is high density worse for the environment, traffic, and crime? Most Americans think so
A photo from a bird’s eye view of densely populated New York City recently went viral on Twitter, with the caption reading “Imagine living here and thinking rural conservatives are the ones who don't care about the environment.” The post sparked a debate over high population density’s impact on the environment and on society more broadly. While the compactness of urban living may not look and feel green, many experts argue that cities are more energy-efficient (fewer cars, less energy consumption, smaller living spaces) than suburban or rural communities.
n a recent poll, YouGov asked 1,000 Americans to weigh in on this debate, as well as other debates surrounding the pros and cons of high-density living. The results show that most Americans, including most of those who live in cities, believe that high density is not only worse for the environment, but also a driver of traffic congestion and crime.
Three in four Americans say it’s better for the environment if houses are built farther apart, while one in four say it’s better for houses to be built closer together. While Americans who live in cities are somewhat more likely than Americans who don’t to say that high density is more environmental, the vast majority of city-dwellers still believe that it’s more eco-friendly to build out rather than up. While Republicans and Independents are aligned on this issue, Democrats are somewhat more likely to say high-density living is environmental, though again, the majority still say it is worse for the environment than building farther apart.
Critics of high density also claim it increases traffic congestion because it brings more people, and therefore more cars and driving, into an area. Others argue that higher-density development reduces traffic by making it easier for people to walk or bike, and more cost-effective to fund public transportation. The majority of Americans (60%) say they think that higher-density development creates more traffic, while 40% say it creates less traffic. People who live in cities are more divided on the issue than Americans who don’t, though over half of city dwellers still say higher density leads to higher levels of traffic. Democrats are more likely to say higher density reduces traffic rather than increases it, while Republicans say the opposite.
While some people may view increased access to public transit as an advantage to high-density living, a mass shooting in New York City on Tuesday highlighted what many fear about it: the potential for being victimized by crime. A man opened fire in a crowded Brooklyn subway car, injuring 23 people and adding to a recent increase in crime in New York public transit.
Do Americans believe there is a link between population density and crime rates? On the one hand, living closer to other people may increase the opportunities a person has to commit a crime. On the other hand, density means that, on average, more people are nearby to witness crimes and the police have less area to patrol. A majority of Americans (62%) say they think high-density areas produce higher crime rates, while only 10% say they produce lower crime rates. The rest – 29% – say density has no effect on crime rates. People who live in cities are less likely to say higher density increases crime than are people who don’t, though half of city dwellers still say this is the case. Democrats are also more skeptical of a positive link between density and crime than Republicans and Independents are, and are more likely to say there is no difference in crime rates between high- and low-density areas.
- Carl Bialik and Linley Sanders contributed to this article
