The Anti-NIMBY crew

[MikeR]

Wow! What a discussion. Now this type of discussion is why I joined UrbanPlanet

But seriously, I know almost nothing of the Eagle Square story, so I read up on it from ArtInRuins: http://www.artinruins.com/arch/rip/eaglesquare/#

From what I can understand here, a complex of mill buildings was razed to make way for a redevelopment project, including a Shaw's plaza.

From reading the announcement regarding the American Locomotice Works Project, it looks like from the map that this proposal is near the Eagle Square project. Now, from jencoleslaw's position on the Plan Commission (similar to Tiverton's Planning Board), her responsibility is to adhere to the city's Comprehensive Plan. If the Comprensive Plan was to allow for re-zoning/demolition/new construction of parcels in the city so as to attract redevelopment of adjoining and nearby parcels (in this case, American Locomotive Works and Rising Sun Mills), well, then the Comprehsive Plan seems to be working for Providence.

I've never seen the Eagle Square project so I can't comment on its layout or integration into the fabric of that section of the city. But, there's no doubt that massive amounts of money are going into redeveloping the Valley/Atwells/and Olneyville Providence -$333 million into ALOW alone, wow!

Sometimes you have to sacrifice a little to get a lot...that's my 2 cents.

MikeR out...

[jencoleslaw]

point of information: i was NOT on the CPC during the battle of eagle square.

[gregw]

Eagle Square was the biggest turning point in Providence development since the saving of Benefit St in the 1950s.

The loss of much of Eagle Square was not as big a tragedy from an architectural point of views as the loss of most of the American Screw Co. in the 70s, Gorham Silverware Co. in the 90s, Silver Spring Bleaching and Dyeing to a Home Depot in 2001 or the Trolley Barn in Cranston last year.

But it galvinized opinion to reclaim rather than destroy RI's industrial heritage and led not only to Struever and other's plans along the Woonasquatucket but also in no small part to the Historic Tax Credit program, which has saved and hopefully will continue to save so many of RI's architectural jewels.

[jencoleslaw]

Eagle Square was the biggest turning point in Providence development since the saving of Benefit St in the 1950s.

The loss of much of Eagle Square was not as big a tragedy from an architectural point of views as the loss of most of the American Screw Co. in the 70s, Gorham Silverware Co. in the 90s, Silver Spring Bleaching and Dyeing to a Home Depot in 2001 or the Trolley Barn in Cranston last year.

But it galvinized opinion to reclaim rather than destroy RI's industrial heritage and led not only to Struever and other's plans along the Woonasquatucket but also in no small part to the Historic Tax Credit program, which has saved and hopefully will continue to save so many of RI's architectural jewels.

Yes, it brought about the industrial and commercial mill building ordinance, which even with flaws, is still a good thing.

BTw, not sure if anyone was there, but several of us implored the developer to fit the home depot into the Silver Spring Bleaching and Dyeing--at least keep one or two exterior walls! And the developer's representative smiled, nodded and said absolutely, he'd look into it and the next day the whole building was down.

[Recchia]

BTw, not sure if anyone was there, but several of us implored the developer to fit the home depot into the Silver Spring Bleaching and Dyeing--at least keep one or two exterior walls! And the developer's representative smiled, nodded and said absolutely, he'd look into it and the next day the whole building was down.

What was the CPC's opinion on the Walmart being built on Charles St.?

[jencoleslaw]

What was the CPC's opinion on the Walmart being built on Charles St.?

The problem with it was that it was ugly but we couldn't keep them out. The property was big enough, it was zoned in a way that commercial was a step up, they weren't asking for any favors or tax breaks--nothing we could tie conditions to. We managed to make them make it more transparent (ie, lots of skylights) and i've been told it will be one of the most environmental (ha!) walmarts around, but i still voted against it because they refused to go beyond the requirement on canopy cover. but i didn't have a legal leg to stand on, really.

I think i was the only dissenter, unfortunately, and NO ONE from the community came out to protest it, so...It was a sad day, frankly, to realise that this was probably the easiest move into a community in the history of walmarts. Sorry Benny's and Mt Pleasant Hardware--but I tried!

[runawayjim]

The problem with it was that it was ugly but we couldn't keep them out. The property was big enough, it was zoned in a way that commercial was a step up, they weren't asking for any favors or tax breaks--nothing we could tie conditions to. We managed to make them make it more transparent (ie, lots of skylights) and i've been told it will be one of the most environmental (ha!) walmarts around, but i still voted against it because they refused to go beyond the requirement on canopy cover. but i didn't have a legal leg to stand on, really.

I think i was the only dissenter, unfortunately, and NO ONE from the community came out to protest it, so...It was a sad day, frankly, to realise that this was probably the easiest move into a community in the history of walmarts. Sorry Benny's and Mt Pleasant Hardware--but I tried!

isn't walmart just taking over the old ames on silver spring?

mt pleasant hardware shoudln't be too affected (the people that work at walmart don't know what they're talking about), but benny's might be... although i bet benny's can compete since they've got pretty good prices anyways.

i know i won't ever be shopping at walmart, i'll still drive to smithfield for target.

[Dan]

Does anybody oppose this project for any reason other than the fact it is a Wal Mart store?

I don't see anything wrong with it... where better to locate a Wal Mart than in place of a shuttered former chain discount retailer. Its good for the economy because shoppers won't go to Massachusetts to shop at Wal Mart, it provides jobs, and it will clean up the Silver Spring area with better exterior lighting and new asphalt pavement (not the patch-land quick fix) and sidewalks.

And if you still think it stinks... it could've been a SUPERCENTER!

[gregw]

Does anybody oppose this project for any reason other than the fact it is a Wal Mart store?

I don't see anything wrong with it... where better to locate a Wal Mart than in place of a shuttered former chain discount retailer. Its good for the economy because shoppers won't go to Massachusetts to shop at Wal Mart, it provides jobs, and it will clean up the Silver Spring area with better exterior lighting and new asphalt pavement (not the patch-land quick fix) and sidewalks.

And if you still think it stinks... it could've been a SUPERCENTER!

Your points are very well taken. However, there are a lot of problems with Wal-Mart particularly with its labor practices. I personally would have preferred Costco, which has a much better track record in this regard. (The nearest Costco now is in Stoughton next to Ikea.)

[Dan]

I personally would have preferred Costco

I've never seen one of these anywhere. I've heard of them, always thought they were like a Sam's or a BJ's (a big BIG Box).

[Frankie811]

mt pleasant hardware shoudln't be too affected (the people that work at walmart don't know what they're talking about), but benny's might be

Quite frankly I'm surprised that Benny's is still in business. I thought they would have gone out of business years ago. I don't expect them to survive much longer. Lowe's & Home Depot must be hurting them.

[MikeR]

but i still voted against it because they refused to go beyond the requirement on canopy cover. but i didn't have a legal leg to stand on, really.

Here's a perfect example on how flaws in a community's ordinances can ome to light. I'm assuming this refers to the amount of trees Wal-Mart needed to plant in traffic islands in the parking lot to meet the ordinance. If it is not enough trees to adequately provide canopy cover, then the zoning ordinances need to be changed to increase the min. number of trees to plant. It's a battle I'm familiar with!

[damus]

Your points are very well taken. However, there are a lot of problems with Wal-Mart particularly with its labor practices. I personally would have preferred Costco, which has a much better track record in this regard. (The nearest Costco now is in Stoughton next to Ikea.)

When I worked at a Supercenter they started me at $11/hr for the overnight stocker position. Every six months you got either a 5% or a 3% raise depending on how well you did. If you didn't do well they gave you nothing... from what I've seen those were the people who have 1) been caught smoking weed during their breaks (and were given a huuuuuge break) 2) slackers and 3) people who called out of work too much. They had a stock purchase plan that a lot of the others were in, as Walmart matched a percentage of the stocks, and advancement really was possible for most people. It's mean, but some of the people who worked there were too dumb to advance past their current positions. Others were happy with their current positions, and I can't blame them. Work at a reasonably fast, but not too strenuous pace, make decent (albeit unspectacular) money. I've read that store managers at Wal-Mart average over 100k, the one i was at led the region in sales so I'm sure that guy was making a lot more. That's not bad for uneducated work your way up through the store employees. The store had been open for 4 years and at the time some of the people who went to high school with me were making more than I'm making now as a recent college graduate stocking shelves. I think the Wal-mart problem might be overexaggerated; perhaps it's a region to region or store to store issue?

[runawayjim]

When I worked at a Supercenter they started me at $11/hr for the overnight stocker position. Every six months you got either a 5% or a 3% raise depending on how well you did. If you didn't do well they gave you nothing... from what I've seen those were the people who have 1) been caught smoking weed during their breaks (and were given a huuuuuge break) 2) slackers and 3) people who called out of work too much. They had a stock purchase plan that a lot of the others were in, as Walmart matched a percentage of the stocks, and advancement really was possible for most people. It's mean, but some of the people who worked there were too dumb to advance past their current positions. Others were happy with their current positions, and I can't blame them. Work at a reasonably fast, but not too strenuous pace, make decent (albeit unspectacular) money. I've read that store managers at Wal-Mart average over 100k, the one i was at led the region in sales so I'm sure that guy was making a lot more. That's not bad for uneducated work your way up through the store employees. The store had been open for 4 years and at the time some of the people who went to high school with me were making more than I'm making now as a recent college graduate stocking shelves. I think the Wal-mart problem might be overexaggerated; perhaps it's a region to region or store to store issue?

from what i've read about most walmarts in general, your experience is an exception to the norm. a recent study found that walmart employees make up large portion of medicaid users because walmart offers them no health care. so while the waltons save themselves some money, the taxpayers take on that extra burden. granted, it was done by the AFL-CIO so it might be biased a bit, but maryland recently passed a law requiring employers of 10,000 or more employees to contribute to health care. the article is here from CNN.

let's not forget about the discovery of illegals working for less than minimum wage to clean walmart stores out west. i have no problem with hiring illegals, but at least pay them the minimum. for some of the richest people in the world, they sure do spend very little on making sure their employees are happy. and they aren't very philanthropic with their money either. for all of us who say bill gates and microsoft are bad, he donates a lot of money to good causes. the first one i saw walmart do was the hunger thing they're doing, and they're only matching people's contributions and only matching up to 5 mil, chump change for the waltons, who (at least in 2003) came in 7, 8, 9, and 10th places for the world's richest billionaires at 16.5 billion each.

i think this is why so many people despise walmart.

[damus]

from what i've read about most walmarts in general, your experience is an exception to the norm. a recent study found that walmart employees make up large portion of medicaid users because walmart offers them no health care. so while the waltons save themselves some money, the taxpayers take on that extra burden. granted, it was done by the AFL-CIO so it might be biased a bit, but maryland recently passed a law requiring employers of 10,000 or more employees to contribute to health care. the article is here from CNN.

let's not forget about the discovery of illegals working for less than minimum wage to clean walmart stores out west. i have no problem with hiring illegals, but at least pay them the minimum. for some of the richest people in the world, they sure do spend very little on making sure their employees are happy. and they aren't very philanthropic with their money either. for all of us who say bill gates and microsoft are bad, he donates a lot of money to good causes. the first one i saw walmart do was the hunger thing they're doing, and they're only matching people's contributions and only matching up to 5 mil, chump change for the waltons, who (at least in 2003) came in 7, 8, 9, and 10th places for the world's richest billionaires at 16.5 billion each.

i think this is why so many people despise walmart.

I forgot about that part about the illegals... I was working there when the scandal broke out. They were all portuguese (sp?) speaking, and then all of a sudden a new batch of Brazillians came in for about a week after the scandal. A week later they were recruiting English-speakers from within the store to do it. As for the health care issue, they did have health care, but the employees were always complaining about how crapty it is. Having said that, they're a figging discount store chain, so you can't expect everyone to make big bucks.

It is contradictory the Waltons havving so much money, I guess all that penny pinching that goes all the way to the CEO's cave of an office goes straight to the shareholders, i.e. the Waltons. Walmart does have philanthropic causes, but they leave that to local stores. It's their policy and I think they have a little slogan in one of their training videos featuring "Mr Sam" saying something about it. Their strategy is to make Wal-Mart a positive prescence in the local community they occupy. Day shift employees and managers commonly took personal days for bake sales, charity walks.

I'm actually fine with them sending manufacturing overseas, they're one of the few companies that periodically inspect foreign workplaces. A CNBC special about Wal-mart showed this and it was found to be flawed, but it's a start. For their "slave wages" the standard of living in developing countries is rising to a level that is better than it used to be but is still substandard to what we expect. We're becoming more of a "knowledge and service" based society than industrial-based. With globalization, it's proably a better thing we're not holding onto industry as much as people would like. We simply cannot compete when it comes to the manufacturing of products that do not take much skill, but sometimes a lot of labor to produce. The Economist complains about the Current Account Deficit the US has with everyone else being a big warning sign, and a lot of that is exasperated by walmart. They aren't just bullies (they really are demanding with suppliers), they are also innovaters, and have made the retail system more efficient. They pushed for the standarization of the bar code, they have the industry's best distribution centers. They're simply playing a winning game in a broken system.

[runawayjim]

I forgot about that part about the illegals... I was working there when the scandal broke out. They were all portuguese (sp?) speaking, and then all of a sudden a new batch of Brazillians came in for about a week after the scandal. A week later they were recruiting English-speakers from within the store to do it. As for the health care issue, they did have health care, but the employees were always complaining about how crapty it is. Having said that, they're a figging discount store chain, so you can't expect everyone to make big bucks.

It is contradictory the Waltons havving so much money, I guess all that penny pinching that goes all the way to the CEO's cave of an office goes straight to the shareholders, i.e. the Waltons. Walmart does have philanthropic causes, but they leave that to local stores. It's their policy and I think they have a little slogan in one of their training videos featuring "Mr Sam" saying something about it. Their strategy is to make Wal-Mart a positive prescence in the local community they occupy. Day shift employees and managers commonly took personal days for bake sales, charity walks.

I'm actually fine with them sending manufacturing overseas, they're one of the few companies that periodically inspect foreign workplaces. A CNBC special about Wal-mart showed this and it was found to be flawed, but it's a start. For their "slave wages" the standard of living in developing countries is rising to a level that is better than it used to be but is still substandard to what we expect. We're becoming more of a "knowledge and service" based society than industrial-based. With globalization, it's proably a better thing we're not holding onto industry as much as people would like. We simply cannot compete when it comes to the manufacturing of products that do not take much skill, but sometimes a lot of labor to produce. The Economist complains about the Current Account Deficit the US has with everyone else being a big warning sign, and a lot of that is exasperated by walmart. They aren't just bullies (they really are demanding with suppliers), they are also innovaters, and have made the retail system more efficient. They pushed for the standarization of the bar code, they have the industry's best distribution centers. They're simply playing a winning game in a broken system.

i know this is causing the thread to go off-topic, so i'll bring it back on topic a bit. first off, i've never been to a walmart store that i would consider good for the community. they purposely undercut the prices of other local stores so that they can put them out of business (whether or not this is really their purpose is up for debate, but it happens). you might call that capitalism at its best, but i call it borderline monopolistic (which is much harder to determine in a chain store).

the waltons may leave their philanthropic activities to the local stores, but i have yet to see one in any area that i have lived do anything for the community or raise money for anyone. on occasion, they'll allow people ask for donations outside their doors, but that's about it. the waltons, having as much money as they do, seem to not really care about much other than the bottom line and their share of it. pleasing share holders is only one part of running a business.

i'm not even going to go into what i think about the insides of their stores, which are lackluster at best.

onto healthcare... they have the money to give it to any of their employees who work full time (this includes full time cashiers). CVS does it. why not walmart (a much larger company that makes a lot more money)? they won't allow their employees to unionize because of this. i'd call the working conditions below standards.

[Cotuit]

i know this is causing the thread to go off-topic, so i'll bring it back on topic a bit. first off, i've never been to a walmart store that i would consider good for the community. they purposely undercut the prices of other local stores so that they can put them out of business...

I should probably move all of this to the thread about the Walmart, but I just wanted to comment on this.

They actually don't undercut prices, what they do is far more deceptive. They'll put in their circular for example a DVD player for $59.99 and they'll put the same DVD player on the end cap in the store. Of course this DVD player is total crap and no one would actually want to buy it for any price. But the low price gets people in the store and into the DVD player aisle. The actual DVD players that are actually worth anything that people actually end up buying are no less expensive (and sometimes more expensive) than their competitors. The store is full of low prices, but nothing of value in the store is at a particularly low price. The store is littered with low price signs, making people think they're getting a deal, when they really aren't.

And don't get me started on the fact that no one actually has any real need for 90% of the crap that is in those stores.

[Recchia]

Does anybody oppose this project for any reason other than the fact it is a Wal Mart store?

My beef with Walmart has always been their inability to compromise when it comes to the physical design of their stores. Never will you see a Walmart in a city that fits well into that city's environment. There are never sidewalks going to Walmart through its parking lot, there are never streetfront entrances, etc. I've seen urban Targets, never an urban Walmart (except maybe overseas). I'm not expecting Walmart to build to the street and put parking in the rear or anything (althought I think it'd be nice in an urban location), but at least have some pedestrian connections and some kind of relationship to the street. Home Depot's the same way (though they give it a shot at least), as is Lowe's, etc.

[damus]

I don't know if its capitalism at its best, but it sure does work. You can dislike these people for making so much money for their shareholders (themselves mostly) by cutting costs at all turns. But just about every successful company has, at the top, super-wealthy owners, executives, and heirs. I don't love Wal-Mart but I sure respect them and I sometimes shop there too.

The healthcare plan, like it or not, fits their cost cutting business model, although I'm not sure what the corporate people get. You're right it is hard to determine a monopoly in a chain store, and I could argue that they are more a leader than a monopoly. Stores such as Sears, Woolworth, A&P have risen and declined. Wal-Mart is at the top of the retail market and is still managing itself in some ways like a small company still trying to break even. That's why they're successful. A true monopoly? NO. In 99.9% of cases, there are still plenty of alternatives to Wal-Mart nearby in every single category Wal-Mart is in. The store I worked at was the first commercial development across the town line from a sort of "mini shopping mecca" for the region and everyone from there was crying foul... somehow Wal-Mart actually increased traffic on the road bringing more people to gas stations, small restaurants, etc. The supermarket that was a quarter of a mile from the new Wal-Mart has taken such a hit from it Wal-Mart that it's still in business. Compare this to true monopolies of the past and present like AT&T, Microsoft, Standard Oil, and Carnegie Steel and it's clear that Wal-Mart is simply a retail giant at the top of its game.

When you add unions into the mess, you add 1) union dues for the employee that in part help line the pocket of more "greedy" people (cough jimmy hoffa cough mafia cough cough Democratic Party) while taking away money the "little guy" could be spending on food for his children and 2) hurt the bottom line of the organization. Other than poor investment in R&D, the reason why GM and Ford are doing so poorly right now is that the unionized employees kept demanding better and better benefits that are choking the companies to death. Are the people at the top of these organizations still making millions? Sure, but the impact the employees health and retirement benefits have on the company are tremendous. In my opinion, unions have gone too far in many cases, but the threat of a workforce unionizing is a good motivator to not piss off too many employees or you might just find yourself in GM's shoes. I know that there is a difference between a manufacturer and a retail outlet which can't be outsourced, but I think I've made my point well enough.

My beef with Walmart has always been their inability to compromise when it comes to the physical design of their stores. Never will you see a Walmart in a city that fits well into that city's environment. There are never sidewalks going to Walmart through its parking lot, there are never streetfront entrances, etc. I've seen urban Targets, never an urban Walmart (except maybe overseas). I'm not expecting Walmart to build to the street and put parking in the rear or anything (althought I think it'd be nice in an urban location), but at least have some pedestrian connections and some kind of relationship to the street. Home Depot's the same way (though they give it a shot at least), as is Lowe's, etc.

In regards to the Urban Wal-Mart, back when I was an "associate" the managers were constantly talking about Wal-Mart's plan to build multi-level stores in New York. I don't know if the company actually made this happen but it was definately at least talked about. I like the idea someone brought up earlier building multi-story malls and placing these "big box" stores on the bottom, but I have an uneducated theory about it. By taking up less real estate, wouldn't the amount of taxes that commercial interests pay to a town drop overall even with a higher rate? At the same time, more undeveloped land would more than likely be developed as residential, adding children to the school system at say 10k a pop, while not paying enough in taxes to just support the kids in school, much less everything else a town needs. Unfortunately, this idiot's opinion is that "big box" may be bad for quality of life, traffic, etc; but may be necessary in our current system for many towns to survive.

[Recchia]

In regards to the Urban Wal-Mart, back when I was an "associate" the managers were constantly talking about Wal-Mart's plan to build multi-level stores in New York. I don't know if the company actually made this happen but it was definately at least talked about. I like the idea someone brought up earlier building multi-story malls and placing these "big box" stores on the bottom, but I have an uneducated theory about it. By taking up less real estate, wouldn't the amount of taxes that commercial interests pay to a town drop overall even with a higher rate? At the same time, more undeveloped land would more than likely be developed as residential, adding children to the school system at say 10k a pop, while not paying enough in taxes to just support the kids in school, much less everything else a town needs. Unfortunately, this idiot's opinion is that "big box" may be bad for quality of life, traffic, etc; but may be necessary in our current system for many towns to survive.

You're not taxed on your base first floor square footage though, you're taxed on the total.

I'm sure if NYC ever got a Walmart, it'd be quite urban friendly. I'd like to see that in other cities as well though. At the least throw in some sidewalks (internally) and move the entrance closer to the street (like on the corner of the street and the sea of parking). Have at least one side be built to the sidewalk with windows and stuff.

[jencoleslaw]

I am sure that if there were some big box ordinances on the books then the walmarts of the world would do what the city said and build urban stores. But, they hire really good lawyers and if they don't need any variances, then there's no negotiating room. so we're stuck with these awful things, that within 10 years are empty because the walmart (or home depot, or Stop and SHop) has moved to a bigger, better location. I'm pretty sure the comp plans allow us to put performance bonds on projects, and yet we never do. not only that, but it is clear that there's no follow up to ensure that the landscaping plan (and other requirements) are actually done as they said they would be.

btw, the walmart lawyer actually argued with me about planting islands so i went around and took pictures and made a little booklet of all the big shopping areas in the greater providence/seekonk area and proved that not only do shopping areas have planting islands, but that the Walmart in Seekonk had them, and they looked great!

almost got arrested, or at least detained at the Seekonk walmart, and still didn't get planting islands for the Providence one.

[Recchia]

I am sure that if there were some big box ordinances on the books then the walmarts of the world would do what the city said and build urban stores. But, they hire really good lawyers and if they don't need any variances, then there's no negotiating room. so we're stuck with these awful things, that within 10 years are empty because the walmart (or home depot, or Stop and SHop) has moved to a bigger, better location. I'm pretty sure the comp plans allow us to put performance bonds on projects, and yet we never do. not only that, but it is clear that there's no follow up to ensure that the landscaping plan (and other requirements) are actually done as they said they would be.

Is this something that has been considered to be included in the Comp Plan and Zoning updates? I hope so...

Is Stop and Shop as bad? They have some great urban stores in Boston, although all the ones around here are terrible. I'd like to say a Dave's build an urban store, I bet they'd be willing to compromise.

btw, the walmart lawyer actually argued with me about planting islands so i went around and took pictures and made a little booklet of all the big shopping areas in the greater providence/seekonk area and proved that not only do shopping areas have planting islands, but that the Walmart in Seekonk had them, and they looked great!

almost got arrested, or at least detained at the Seekonk walmart, and still didn't get planting islands for the Providence one.

I'm starting to like you more and more.

[damus]

You're not taxed on your base first floor square footage though, you're taxed on the total.

I'm sure if NYC ever got a Walmart, it'd be quite urban friendly. I'd like to see that in other cities as well though. At the least throw in some sidewalks (internally) and move the entrance closer to the street (like on the corner of the street and the sea of parking). Have at least one side be built to the sidewalk with windows and stuff.

Thanks I was wondering how they did that. I wish our society would change and enact zoning laws promoting increased density development. I say it's unfortunate but the only way to get people to change is to force it... perhaps raise the gas tax a dollar and then earmark it for mass-transit development.

[citygirl]

It drives me crazy that these massive parking lots are going in without the slightest attempt to treat stormwater on the part of developers or --- apparently --- the slightest effort on the part of the city to make them comply with municipal stormwater regulations! Right now, one of the simplest measures a builder can take is to slightly depress those parking lot planting islands, using them as infiltration basins with plants that can withstand periodic saturation. Instead of raising the islands, where they're ususally planted with inappropriate trees that shrivel miserably for lack of maintenance, they could create rain gardens and save some of the cost of building massive detention ponds. But I forget ---- that would take thinking on their part and enforcement on the city's!

[runturtlerun]

For example, the density catalog from the Lincoln Land Institute gives examples showing how the same number of units can look and feel completely different depending on how the development is done, how they're placed on the street and in context, and other factors.

Not sure if this is the density catalog citygirl was talking about, but I attended this workshop at the Lincoln Land Institute about visualizing density. Here's a link to much of the materials they discussed ...

http://www.lincolninst.edu/subcenters/visu...sity/index.aspx

The quiz and image gallery are particularly useful.