Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
A Smart Growth America fiscal impact analysis found that high-density development produced way better returns for local political jurisdictions.
The fiscal impact of different development scenarios for a 1,400-acre parcel in Madison, Wisconsin, on government's bottom line. The sprawliest scenarios provide the smallest public returns. Chart: Smart Growth America
A Smart Growth America fiscal impact analysis found that high-density development produced way better returns for local political jurisdictions.

When someone builds a new home, does it make the city stronger and more fiscally sound? Or does it drain public resources? The answer depends a lot on where it's sited and, more specifically, where it lies in relation to other homes and businesses.

Smart Growth America has developed a fiscal impact model that helps predict how developments will help or hurt the municipal bottom line. The tool they developed [PDF] takes into account how density affects the cost of delivering city services, from streets and sewers to fire protection, school busing, and garbage collection.

SGA applied its model to a proposed 1,400-acre development in Madison, Wisconsin, called Pioneer Square. Researchers varied the density and number of units across five development scenarios, ranging from "low density" (about two housing units per acre) to "Compact Plus 50" (about 7 units per acre).

According to SGA's model, the higher density development scenarios would have a far better effect on the city's budget [PDF]. Compared to the "low density" scenario, "Compact Plus 50" would generate 233 percent more revenue per acre for the city.

SGA says the results are actually conservative because the tool assumes higher-density properties will have lower taxable value, due to smaller lot sizes.

Unfortunately, most cities don't use very sophisticated methods to estimate the impacts of new housing developments. Instead, reports SGA, they assume each new home in the city will impose the same costs as the average home. That ignores all the variability in types of housing -- and could leave cities with big financial liabilities down the road.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

USDOT Secretary Sean Duffy Is Dead Wrong About Bike Lanes

The Secretary of Transportation says he hasn't seen enough data to believe in the benefits of bike lanes. So we put together an explainer help him out — mostly using information from his own department.

April 25, 2025

Friday Video: Check Out Lorde On a Bike!

The Kiwi singer is on the top of the charts — and in our bike-riding hearts.

April 25, 2025

Friday’s Headlines Dodge Death

Thankfully, traffic deaths have started to fall. But cars and drivers are still killing too many people. Why?

April 25, 2025

Breaking: US DOT is Coming For America’s ‘DEI’ Dollars, Threatening ‘Sanctuary’ Cities With Pulled Funds

Advocates are raising the alarm about yet another vague and disturbingly broad letter from Sean Duffy — and the fierce battle that's likely to follow it.

April 24, 2025
See all posts