Are Compact Cities Necessarily Better?

Many urban planners seem to have a strong preference for compact cities. They believe that cities with more tall buildings and greater accessibility to mass transit are better in every possible way. Tall buildings and mass transit are expected to make cities greener, and people more productive. They also believe that people are more likely to walk or cycle in cities that are compact. So, they assume that people are more likely to be healthier in compact cities.

Such beliefs, however, seem to be overstated. It is, for instance, true that high densities are necessary to allow greater communication among firms and allow them to provide complementary services to learn from one another. However, much of these benefits do not have to do with compactness.

Companies working in the same sector want to be closer to one another. For example, software companies in Silicon Valley benefit from being close to other software companies. This does not happen because of density, but because of sorting. Silicon Valley is not compact, and compactness is not necessary for sorting.  

Stores in Delhi's central business district Connaught Place, for example, would prefer to be situated very close to one another. This is because it saves consumers' time; people also have greater accessibility to these stores as they are located near major transit networks. It is also true that tall buildings will allow stores in Connaught Place to offer better services, cater to more people, and reduce crowding. This, however, does not mean that cities where everybody lives and works close to one another in taller buildings are more productive. Delhi does not have to be a compact city for Connaught Place to be densely built.

An unpleasant fact confronts proponents of compact living. Cities in the United States, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, are spread out. It is true that the large cities in the US have many high-rises and skyscrapers. However, people have long been moving to suburbs, largely because of greater car ownership. The financially well-off are more likely to move to suburbs. This means that people tend to move to suburbs when they are given a choice. This is true of even Indian cities like Delhi, where car ownership is relatively high. The appeal of Connaught Place has declined, and the appeal of other markets has been rising.

It is true that there is some evidence that people walk more in densely built urban areas. It makes sense that people have more incentive to walk to their office when offices and residence are close to one another. It also makes sense that people are more likely to walk when buildings are mixed-use and densely built, because it is easy to meet needs without driving. This is however, not an ironclad proof that people walk more in compact cities. Walkability has more to do with geography and climate. In many Indian cities, regardless of how compact they are, people are not likely to walk or cycle in summers if they have a choice. Moreover, there is some evidence that people in dense, urban areas are healthy because people with a preference for walking live in urban areas. It is also because income levels are higher in dense, urban areas in the US.

People are also willing to pay more for owning a house in the suburbs. They are also willing to spend more time commuting to live in the suburbs. It is obvious why people are still willing to live in the suburbs when they have to pay more for housing and transportation. Even though it is true that allowing taller buildings will leave more space for greenery and open spaces, the fact remains that people in suburbs have more exposure to green spaces and open spaces. They value this, and are willing to pay more for this. This is not an arbitrary preference. There seems to be some evidence that this is associated with greater health and productivity. Exposure to greenery seems to make people healthy, apart from bringing positivity.

So, while it is true that high-density buildings are important in areas where land is expensive, it is not clear that compact cities are more productive, healthy or less polluted.

For regular updates on real estate, click here