The Tyee has a great article on city densities and how a city needs to change as the number of people that live within a specific area increases. That said, the question that comes to mind is — how do we appropriately shape city areas based on demographics or population?

Erick Villagomez makes an interesting point about the eco-density initiative:

“As the argument goes, housing people closer together reduces urban sprawl and our ecological footprint by making better use of smaller parcels of land. Similarly, with more people within a designated area, higher density allows communities to support local commerce, amenities, and transit. This, in turn, allows for the potential creation of walkable and transit-friendly communities.

With regards to housing affordability, the connection to density is related to housing type. In contrast to the typical homogenous single-family neighbourhoods, the belief holds that more diverse, dense house types create more diverse and affordable housing options (due to lowered construction costs, decreased development fees, and fees saved from using existing infrastructure) for a variety of households. Furthermore, this increased density would make new, more expensive energy technologies (i.e. district heating, etc.) more viable.”

While this seems like it is definitely the right approach to housing — I wonder about people who don’t want to live in such dense areas and are willing and able to pay for more spacious land in the city. Will the supply and demand economics continue to work for real estate in this case? Or will we have to radically change our approach to urban development in the long-term? Obviously the households that are better off and able to afford more spacious living environments may reject the eco density approach. Is this wrong? I would say probably not. It is after all a person’s lifestyle, it’s neither right or wrong but what is necessary is that regardless of what lifestyle we come from, we need to re-think how we approach land and the value of land.