Density dilemma, part 3: 1000 Friends of Florida weigh in

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm

Reporter - News Analyst

November 16, 2016 1:00 a.m.

Density is a difficult concept to understand in terms of urban planning for the average citizen. Many people assume that an increase in density means a corresponding decrease in green space. Yet the opposite is true as this recent report concludes.

A working team of representatives of 1000 Friends of Florida, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs (DACS) and the University of Florida’s GeoPlan Center released a report in September 2016 entitled Mapping Florida’s Future—Alternative Patterns of Development in 2070. Commonly known as the Florida 2070 Report, this extensively researched document spotlighted alternative scenarios to accommodate the 14.9 million or more new residents that Florida expects to see by the year 2070 when state population is expected to reach 33.7 million.

While Central and South Florida are expected to grow more than Northeast Florida and the Panhandle, if existing trends continue, the percent of developed land in the Northeast will almost double across the region. But this percent can be reduced almost 5 percent—and protected land increased more than 15 percent, if decision makers adopt development alternative scenarios.

The single most important finding of the study is that “even modest increases in development densities can result in substantial savings of land. These lands in turn could remain in agricultural production or be safeguarded to ensure viable ecosystem services on which humans depend.”

The report concludes: “There are clear fiscal advantages to more compact development patterns. These include lower costs to the public for roads, drinking water, stormwater management and sewage treatment. This can result in greater diversity of transportation options and can save individuals time and money otherwise spent commuting or waiting in traffic. Higher gross development densities do not mean that choice in housing type will be lost...in fact in some places it might mean that housing choice will increase.”

Report authors submit the following points for consideration by local governments:

Save Special Places

• Protect vital conservation, agricultural and other working lands like those on Florida Forever and Florida Greenways lists
• Support funding for greenways and corridors that protect wildlife habitat and provide recreational opportunities
• Establish incentives and increase funding to help landowners conserve important agricultural lands and other working landscapes
• Work to significantly lessen the impact of new development on Florida’s lands and waters

Build Better Communities

• Support infill and redevelopment in a manner that is sensitive to existing communities
• When new areas are developed, give priority to those near existing communities and infrastructure
• Promote a mixture of homes, shops, schools and offices within close proximity
• Include a range of housing choices to ensure affordability
• Design for multiple transportation options, including walking, biking and public transportation
• Protect significant historic and natural resources within communities

For more detailed information on Florida 2070, including an online presentation from which the slides in this article were taken, state and regional maps and the technical report with methodology, please visit www.1000friendsofflorida.org/Florida2070.

The density dilemma: Part 1

The density dilemma, Part 2: New Urbanism, Smart Growth and Form-Based Codes

Editor's Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne's many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.