This document discusses strategies for improving community engagement and addressing neighborhood opposition during the planning process for dense infill and redevelopment projects. It advocates for placing community impacts and design factors on equal footing with density and height. The document recommends focusing intensely on the edge between new development and existing neighborhoods through highly visual and helpful approaches. It also suggests pre-thinking how to address common neighborhood concerns like impacts on traffic, parking, noise, and community character. The overall goal is to change how land use battles are conducted by delivering better designed projects and neighborhood outcomes through comprehensive stakeholder involvement.

1. Planning for Dense Infill
and Redevelopment
David Morley
Lisa Nisenson
Dan Parolek
Norman Wright
New Partners for Smart Growth
February 8, 2013

2. WHY ARE WE HERE?
If neighborhood opposition is the # 1* reason
infill fails, why are we not addressing it with
every ounce of energy we have?
* or #2 depending on the whims of the finance industry

3. WHY DO THIS?
• To put all design factors on par with (or ahead of) density/height;
• to signal an honest, dedicated approach to identifying and addressing
potential impacts;
• to provide solutions in the design process that will lower costs and improve
operation and maintenance over time;
• to identify the full range of participants needed throughout the life of the
project and get them to the table;
• to provide stakeholders an organized, comprehensive resource;
• to change the dynamics of land-use battles to deliver better neighborhood
design.

4. WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS NEED
• Insane focus on the edge
• Insanely visual
• Insanely helpful
• Insanely relatable
• Don’t just address – pre-think

5. WHAT DOES LOOK LIKE?
CONSIDERATIONS
• the development context;
• the planning and zoning context;
• the process for the plan effort, including
compatibility and transitions;
• various potential impacts;
• options for preventing or mitigating impacts
through policy, design, and transportation
infrastructure;
• Long-term operations, maintenance, and
enforcement considerations.

6. WHY NOT LISTEN?
Visual
• Ugly height and massing of buildings
• Yucky building materials
• Crappy, cheap-looking signs
• Shadows & solar rights
• Junky balconies
• TMI
Character
• Changes to community character
• Destruction of historic buildings and features
• (Un)safety
• Loss of affordable housing or retail
• Stingy park space
Financial
• Decreased Property Values
• Overcrowded, lower-performing schools

7. WHY NOT LISTEN?
Environmental
• Poor air circulation (wind tunnels or lack of circulation)
• Screwy green space/token street trees
• Urban heat island
• Increased runoff & flooded basements
Traffic and Transportation
• Increased traffic & congestion
• Cut-through traffic
• Overflow parking
• Insufficient curbside parking and loading space
• Poor passageways for pedestrians
Operational
• Noise and odor
• Light pollution and glare
• Live music
• Garbage & recycling collection
• Outdoor dining
• Dogs & Pets

8. WHY NOT COMMUNICATE BETTER?

9. WE NEED SOMETHING
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
• Multiple Audiences
– Adjacent Neighbors
– Developers and Architects
– Planners and Engineers (lots of engineers)
– Elected/Appointed Officials
– Policy Wonks & Researchers
– General Public
– Vendors
• Visual
• Readily shared
• Aspirational
• Solution Driven

10. Beyond Early Adopters
From Diffusion of Innovation, Everett Rogers

11. WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE “DISRUPTERS?”

14. Transition slide
• Either 2nd slide announcing line up or last of
mine tying together.