Topic: Uso de suelo y zonificación

Data Drain: The Land and Water Impacts of the AI Boom

By Jon Gorey, Octubre 17, 2025

A low hum emerges from within a vast, dimly lit tomb, whose occupant devours energy and water with a voracious, inhuman appetite. The beige, boxy data center is a vampire of sorts—pallid, immortal, thirsty. Sheltered from sunlight, active all night. And much like a vampire, at least according to folkloric tradition, it can only enter a place if it’s been invited inside.

In states and counties across the US, lawmakers aren’t just opening the door for these metaphorical, mechanical monsters. They’re actively luring them in, with tax breaks and other incentives, eager to lay claim to new municipal revenues and a piece of the explosive growth surrounding artificial intelligence.

That may sound hyperbolic, but data centers truly are resource-ravenous. Even a mid-sized data center consumes as much water as a small town, while larger ones require up to 5 million gallons of water every day—as much as a city of 50,000 people.

Powering and cooling their rows of server stacks also takes an astonishing amount of electricity. A conventional data center—think cloud storage for your work documents or streaming videos—draws as much electricity as 10,000 to 25,000 households, according to the International Energy Agency. But a newer, AI-focused “hyperscale” data center can use as much power as 100,000 homes or more. Meta’s Hyperion data center in Louisiana, for example, is expected to draw more than twice the power of the entire city of New Orleans once completed. Another Meta data center planned in Wyoming will use more electricity than every home in the state combined.

And of course, unlike actual clouds, data centers require land. Lots of it. Some of the largest data centers being built today will cover hundreds of acres with impermeable steel, concrete, and paved surfaces—land that will no longer be available for farmland, nature, or housing—and require new transmission line corridors and other associated infrastructure as well.

Data centers have been part of our built landscape for over a decade, however—many of them tucked into unassuming office parks, quietly processing our web searches and storing our cellphone photos. So why the sudden concern? Artificial intelligence tools trained with large language models, such as Open AI’s ChatGPT, among others, use exponentially more computing power than traditional cloud services. And the largest technology companies, including Amazon, Meta, Google, and Microsoft, are investing quickly and heavily in AI.

The number of US data centers more than doubled between 2018 and 2021 and, fueled by investments in AI, that number has already doubled again. Early in the AI boom, in 2023, US data centers consumed 176 terawatt-hours of electricity, roughly as much as the entire nation of Ireland (whose electric grid is itself nearly maxed out, prompting data centers there to use polluting off-grid generators), and that’s expected to double or even triple as soon as 2028.

This rapid proliferation can put an enormous strain on local and regional resources—burdens that many host communities are not fully accounting for or prepared to meet.

“Demand for data centers and processing has just exploded exponentially because of AI,” says Kim Rueben, former senior fiscal systems advisor at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Virginia and Texas have long had tax incentives in place to attract new data centers, and “other states are jumping on the bandwagon,” she says, hoping to see economic growth and new tax revenues.

But at a Land Policy and Digitalization conference convened by the Lincoln Institute last spring, Rueben likened the extractive nature of data centers to coal mines. “I don’t think places are acknowledging all the costs,” she says.

Yes, Virginia, There Is a Data Clause

At that conference, Chris Miller, executive director of the Piedmont Environmental Council, explained how roughly two-thirds of the world’s internet traffic passes through Northern Virginia. The region already hosts the densest concentration of data centers anywhere in the world, with about 300 facilities in just a handful of counties. Dozens more are planned or in development, ready to consume the region’s available farmland, energy, and water, enticed by a statewide incentive that saves companies more than $130 million in sales and use taxes each year.

Despite the state-level tax break, the data centers make significant contributions to local coffers. In Loudon County, which has over 27 million square feet of existing data center space, officials expect the total real and property tax revenues collected from local data centers in fiscal year 2025 to approach $900 million, nearly as much as the county’s entire operating budget. The proportion of revenue derived from data centers has grown so lopsided that the county’s board of supervisors is considering adjusting the tax rate, so as not to be so reliant on a single source.

Existing and planned data centers in Northern Virginia. The state has been dubbed “the data center capital of the world.” Credit: Piedmont Environmental Council.

While many communities see data centers as an economic boon due to that tax revenue, the facilities themselves are not powerful long-term job engines. Most of the jobs they create are rooted in their construction, not their ongoing operation, and thus are largely temporary.

Decades ago, PEC supported some of the data center development in Northern Virginia, says Julie Bolthouse, PEC’s director of land policy. But the industry has changed dramatically since then. When AOL had its headquarters in what’s known as Data Center Alley, for example, the company’s data center was a small part of a larger campus, “which had pedestrian trails around it, tennis courts, basketball courts … at its peak, it had 5,300 employees on that site,” Bolthouse says. The campus has since been demolished, and three large data center facilities are being built on the site. “There’s a big fence around it for security purposes, so it’s totally isolated from the community now, and it is only going to employ about 100 to 150 people on the same piece of land. That’s the difference.”

The facilities have also gotten “massive,” Bolthouse adds. “Each one of those buildings is using as much as a city’s worth of power, so that power infrastructure is having a huge impact on our communities. All the transmission lines that have to be built, the eminent domain used to get the land for those transmission lines, all of the energy infrastructure, gas plants, pipelines that deliver the gas, the air pollution associated with that, the climate impacts of all of that.”

Across Northern Virginia, on-site diesel generators—thousands of them, each the size of a rail car—spew diesel fumes, creating air quality issues. “No other land use that I know of uses as many generators as a data center does,” Bolthouse says. And while such generators are officially classified as emergency backup power, data centers are permitted to run them for “demand response” for 50 hours at a time, she adds. “That’s a lot of air pollution locally. That’s particulate matter and NOx [nitrogen oxides], which impacts growing lungs of children, can add cases of asthma, and can exacerbate heart disease and other underlying diseases in the elderly.”

And then there’s the water issue.

‘Like a Giant Soda Straw’

A study by the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) and University of Houston found that data centers in Texas will use 49 billion gallons of water in 2025, and as much as 399 billion gallons in 2030. That would be equivalent to drawing down the largest reservoir in the US—157,000-acre Lake Mead—by more than 16 feet in a year.

Anyone who’s accidentally left their phone out in the rain or dropped it in a puddle might wonder what a building full of expensive, delicate electronics could want with millions of gallons of water. It’s largely for cooling purposes. Coursing with electrical current, server stacks can get very hot, and evaporative room cooling is among the simplest and cheapest ways to keep the chips from getting overheated and damaged.

What that means, however, is that the water isn’t just used for cooling and then discharged as treatable wastewater; much of it evaporates in the process—poof.

“Even if they’re using reclaimed or recycled water, that water is no longer going back into the base flow of the rivers and streams,” Bolthouse says. “That has ecological impacts as well as supply issues. Everybody is upstream from someone else.” Washington, DC, for example, will still lose water supply if Northern Virginia data centers use recycled or reclaimed water, because that water won’t make it back into the Potomac River. Evaporative cooling also leaves behind high concentrations of salts and other contaminants, she adds, creating water quality issues.

There are less water-intensive ways to cool data centers, including closed-loop water systems, which require more electricity, and immersion cooling, in which servers are submerged in a bath of liquid, such as a synthetic oil, that conducts heat but not electricity. Immersion cooling allows for a denser installation of servers as well, but is not yet widely used, largely due to cost.

Ironically, it can be hard to confirm specific data about data centers. Given the proprietary nature of AI technology and, perhaps, the potential for public backlash, many companies are less than forthcoming about how much water their data centers consume. Google, for its part, reported using more than 5 billion gallons of water across all its data centers in 2023, with 31 percent of its freshwater withdrawals coming from watersheds with medium or high water scarcity.

A 2023 study by the University of California Riverside estimated that an AI chat session of 20 or so queries uses up to a bottle of freshwater. That amount can vary depending on the platform, with more sophisticated models demanding larger volumes of water, while other estimates suggest it could be closer to a few spoonfuls per query.

“But what goes unacknowledged, from a natural systems perspective, is that all water is local,” says Peter Colohan, director of partnerships and program innovation at the Lincoln Institute, who helped create the Internet of Water. “It’s a small amount of water for a few queries, but it’s all being taken from one basin where that data center is located—that’s thousands and thousands of gallons of water being drawn from one place from people doing their AI queries from all over the world,” he says.

“Wherever they choose to put a data center, it is like a giant soda straw sucking water out of that basin,” Colohan continues. “And when you take water from a place, you have to reduce demand or put water back in that same place, there’s no other solution. In some cases, at least, major data center developers have begun to recognize this problem and are actively engaging in water replenishment where it counts.”

Locating data centers in cooler, wetter regions can help reduce the amount of water they use and the impact of their freshwater withdrawals. And yet roughly two-thirds of the data centers built since 2022 have been located in water-stressed regions, according to a Bloomberg News analysis, including hot, dry climates like Arizona.

The warm water-cooling system at a Sandia Labs data center in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The data center earned LEED Gold certification for efficiency in 2020. Credit: Bret Latter/Sandia Labs via Flickr CC.

It’s not just cooling the server rooms and chips that consumes water. About half of the electricity currently used by US data centers comes from fossil fuel power plants, which themselves use a lot of water, as they heat up steam to turn their massive turbines.

And the millions of microchips processing all that information? By the time they reach a data center, each chip has already consumed thousands of gallons of water. Manufacturing these tiny, powerful computing components requires “ultrapure” treated water to rinse off silicon residue without damaging the chips. It takes about 1.5 gallons of tap water to produce a gallon of ultrapure water, and the typical chip factory uses about 10 million gallons of ultrapure water each day, according to the World Economic Forum—as much as 33,000 US households.


As communities consider the benefits and risks of data center development, consumers might consider our own role in the growth of data centers, and whether our use of AI is worth the price of the water, power, and land it devours.

There could be important uses for artificial intelligence—if it can be harnessed to solve complex problems, for instance, or to improve the efficiency of water systems and electric grids.

There are clearly superfluous uses, too. A YouTube channel with 35 million subscribers, for example, features AI-generated music videos … of AI-generated songs. The MIT Technology Review estimates that, unlike simple text queries, using AI to create video content is extremely resource-heavy: Making a five-second AI-generated video uses about as much electricity as running a microwave nonstop for over an hour.

Data center defenders tend to point to the fact that Americans use more water each year to irrigate golf courses (more than 500 billion gallons) and lawns (over 2 trillion gallons) than AI data centers use. However, that argument rings false: America has a well-documented addiction to green grass that is also not serving us well. The solution, water experts say, lies in water conservation and consumer education, not comparing one wasteful use to another.


 

Putting a Finite Resource First

Even a small data center can place an immense, concentrated burden on local infrastructure and natural resources. In Newton County, Georgia, a Meta data center that opened in 2018 uses 500,000 gallons of water per day—10 percent of the entire county’s water consumption. And given Georgia’s cheap power and generous state tax breaks, Newton County continues to field requests for new data center permits—some of which would use up to 6 million gallons of water per day, more than doubling what the entire county currently consumes.

The intense demands that data centers place on regional resources make for complicated decision-making at the local level. Communities and regional water officials must engage in discussions about data centers early on, and with a coordinated, holistic understanding of existing resources and potential impacts on the energy grid and the watershed, says Mary Ann Dickinson, policy director for land and water at the Lincoln Institute. “We would like to help communities make smarter decisions about data centers, helping them analyze and plan for the potential impacts to their community structures and systems.”

“Water is often one of the last things that gets thought about, so one of the things that we’re really promoting is early engagement,” says John Hernon, strategic development manager at Thames Water in the UK. “So when you’re thinking about data centers, it’s not just about the speed you’re going to get, it’s not just about making sure there’s a lot of power available—we need to make sure that water is factored in at the earliest possible thinking … at the forefront, rather than an afterthought.”

Despite its damp reputation, London doesn’t receive a whole lot of rainfall compared to the northern UK — less than 25 inches a year, on average, or roughly half of what falls in New York City. Yet because so much growth is centered on London, the Thames Water service area holds about 80 percent of the UK’s data centers, Hernon says, and another 100 or so are proposed.

What’s more, their water usage peaks during the hottest, driest times of the year, when the utility can least accommodate the extra demand. “That’s why we talk about restricting or reducing or objecting to [data centers],” Hernon says. “It’s not because we don’t like them. We absolutely get it, we need them ourselves. AI will massively help our call center … which means we can have more people out fixing leaks and proactively managing our networks.”

Keeping the Lights On

One way for data centers to use less water is to rely more heavily on air-cooling technology, but this requires more energy —which may in turn increase water use indirectly, depending on the power source. What’s more, regional grids are already struggling to meet the demand of these power-hungry facilities, and there are hundreds more in the works. “A lot of these projects have been announced, but it’s not clear what can come on fast enough to power them,” says Kelly T. Sanders, associate professor of engineering at University of Southern California.

The government wants US technology companies to build their AI data centers domestically—not just for economic reasons, but for national security purposes as well. But even as the Trump administration appears to understand the enormous energy demands data centers will place on the electric grid, it has actively squashed new wind power projects, such as Revolution Wind off the coast of Rhode Island.

NREL (the National Renewable Energy Laboratory) created this overlay map of transmission lines and data center locations to “help visualize the overlap and simplify co-system planning.” Credit: NREL.gov.

Other carbon-free alternatives like small modular reactors (SMRs) and geothermal energy have bipartisan support, Sanders says. “But the problem is, even if you put shovels in the ground for an SMR today, it’s going to take 10 years,” she says. “The things that we can do the fastest are wind, solar, and batteries. But in the last six months we’ve lost a lot of the incentives for clean energy, and there’s an all-out war on wind. Wind projects that are already built, already paid for, are being canceled. And to me, that’s peculiar, because that’s electricity that would be ready to go out on the grid soon, in some of these regions that are really congested.”

Data centers are among the reasons ratepayers nationwide have seen their electric bills increase at twice the rate of inflation in the past year. Part of that is the new infrastructure data centers will require, such as new power plants, transmission lines, or other investments. Those costs, as well as ongoing grid maintenance and upgrades, are typically shared by all electric customers in a service area, through charges added to utility bills.

This creates at least two issues: While the tax revenues of a new data center will benefit only the host community, the entire electric service area must pay for the associated infrastructure. Secondly, if a utility makes that huge investment, but the data center eventually closes or needs much less electricity than projected, it’s the ratepayers who will foot the bill, not the data center.

Some tech companies are securing their own clean power independent of the grid—Microsoft, for example, signed a 20-year agreement to purchase energy directly from the Three Mile Island nuclear plant. But that approach isn’t ideal either, Sanders says. “These data centers are still going to use transmission lines and all those grid assets, but if they’re not buying the electricity from the utility, they’re not paying for all that infrastructure through their rate bills,” she says.

Aside from generating new power, Sanders says, there are strategies to squeeze more capacity from the existing grid. “One is good old energy efficiency, and the data centers themselves have all of the incentives aligned to try to make their processes more efficient,” she says. AI itself could potentially also help enhance grid performance. “We can use artificial intelligence to give us more information about how power is flowing through the grid, and so we can optimize that power flow, which can give us more capacity than we would have otherwise,” Sanders says.

Another strategy is to make the grid more flexible. Most of the time, and in most regions of the US, we only use about 40 percent of the grid’s total capacity, Sanders says, give or take. “We build the capacity of the grid to meet the hottest day … and that’s where we worry about these large data center loads,” she says. A coordinated network of batteries, however —including in people’s homes and EVs—can add flexibility and stabilize the grid during times of peak demand. In July, California’s Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) conducted the largest-ever test of its statewide “virtual power plant,” using residential batteries to supply 535 megawatts of power to the grid for two full hours at sundown.

With some intentional, coordinated planning—”it’s not just going to happen naturally,” Sanders says—it may be possible to add more capacity without requiring a lot of new generation if data centers can reduce their workloads during peak times and invest in large-scale battery backups: “There is a world in which these data centers can actually be good grid actors, where they can add more flexibility to the grid.”

Confronting Trade-Offs With Land Policy

As the demand for data centers grows, finding suitable locations for these facilities will force communities to confront myriad and imperfect trade-offs between water, energy, land, money, health, and climate. “Integrated land use planning, with sustainable land, water, and energy practices, is the only way we can sustainably achieve the virtuous circle needed to reap the benefits of AI and the economic growth associated with it,” Colohan says.

For example, using natural gas to meet the anticipated electricity load of Texas data centers would require 50 times more water than using solar generation, according to the HARC study, and 1,000 times more water than wind. But while powering new data centers with wind farms would consume the least water, it would also require the most land—four times as much land as solar, and 42 times as much as natural gas.

Absent an avalanche of new, clean power, most data centers are adding copious amounts of greenhouse gases to our collective emissions, at a time when science demands we cut them sharply to limit the worst impacts of climate change. Louisiana regulators in August approved plans to build three new gas power plants to offset the expected electricity demand from Meta’s Hyperion AI data center.

While towns or counties compete with one another to attract data centers, the host communities will reap the tax benefits while the costs—the intense water demand, the higher electricity bills, the air pollution from backup generators—will be dispersed more regionally, including to areas that won’t see any new tax revenue.

That’s one reason data center permitting needs more state oversight, Bolthouse says. “The only approval that they really have to get is from the locality, and the locality is not looking at the regional impacts,” she says. PEC is also pushing for ratepayer protections and sustainability commitments. “We want to make sure we’re encouraging the most efficient and sustainable practices within the industry, and that we’re requiring mitigation when impacts can’t be avoided.”

Too close for comfort? A data center abuts homes in Loudoun County, Virginia. Credit: Hugh Kenny via Piedmont Environmental Council.

PEC and others are also pressing for greater transparency from the industry. “Very often, data centers are coming in with non-disclosure agreements,” Bolthouse says. “They’re hiding a lot of information about water usage, energy usage, air quality impacts, emissions—none of that information is disclosed, and so communities don’t really know what they’re getting into.”

“We need communities to be educated about what they’re facing, and what their trade-offs are when they let in a data center,” Colohan says. “What is the cost—the true cost—of a data center? And then how do you turn that true cost into a benefit through integrated land policy?”

Rueben says she understands the desire, especially in communities experiencing population loss, to tap into a growing industry. But rather than competing with each other to attract data centers, she says, communities ought to be having broader conversations about job growth and economic development strategies, factoring in the true costs and trade-offs these facilities present, and asking the companies to provide more guarantees and detailed plans.

“Forcing data center operators to explain how they’re going to run the facility more efficiently, and where they’re going to get their water from—and not just assuming that they have first access to the water and energy systems,” she says, “is a shift in perspective that we kind of need government officials to make.”


Jon Gorey is a staff writer at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

Lead image: Data center facilities in Prince William County, Virginia. The county has 59 data centers in operation or under construction. Credit: Hugh Kenny via Piedmont Environmental Council.

Coming to Terms with Density: An Urban Planning Concept in the Spotlight 

September 15, 2025

By Anthony Flint, September 15, 2025
 

It’s an urban planning concept that sounds extra wonky, but it is critical in any discussion of affordable housing, land use, and real estate development: density.

In this episode of the Land Matters podcast, two practitioners in architecture and urban design shed some light on what density is all about, on the ground, in cities and towns trying to add more housing supply. 

The occasion is the revival of a Lincoln Institute resource called Visualizing Density, which was pushed live this month at lincolninst.edu after extensive renovations and updates. It’s a visual guide to density based on a library of aerial images of buildings, blocks, and neighborhoods taken by photographer Alex Maclean, originally published (and still available) as a book by Julie Campoli. 

It’s a very timely clearinghouse, as communities across the country work to address affordable housing, primarily by reforming zoning and land use regulations to allow more multifamily housing development—generally less pricey than the detached single-family homes that have dominated the landscape. 

Residential density is understood to be the number of homes within a defined area of land, in the US most often expressed as dwelling units per acre. A typical suburban single-family subdivision might be just two units per acre; a more urban neighborhood, like Boston’s Back Bay, has a density of about 60 units per acre. 

Demographic trends suggest that future homeowners and renters will prefer greater density in the form of multifamily housing and mixed-use development, said David Dixon, a vice president at Stantec, a global professional services firm providing sustainable engineering, architecture, and environmental consulting services. Over the next 20 years, the vast majority of households will continue to be professionals without kids, he said, and will not be interested in big detached single-family homes.  

Instead they seek “places to walk to, places to find amenity, places to run into friends, places to enjoy community,” he said. “The number one correlation that you find for folks under the age of 35, which is when most of us move for a job, is not wanting to be auto-dependent. They are flocking to the same mixed-use, walkable, higher-density, amenitized, community-rich places that the housing market wants to build … Demand and imperative have come together. It’s a perfect storm to support density going forward.” 

Tensions often arise, however, when new, higher density is proposed for existing neighborhoods, on vacant lots or other redevelopment sites. Tim Love, principal and founder of the architecture firm Utile, and a professor at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design, said he’s seen the wariness from established residents as he helps cities and towns comply with the MBTA Communities Act, a Massachusetts state law that requires districts near transit stations with an allowable density of 15 units per acre. 

Some towns have rebelled against the law, which is one of several state zoning reform initiatives across the US designed to increase housing supply, ultimately to help bring prices down. 

Many neighbors are skeptical because they associate multifamily density with large apartment buildings of 100 or 200 units, Love said. But most don’t realize there is an array of so-called “gentle density” development opportunities for buildings of 12 to 20 units, that have the potential to blend in more seamlessly with many streetscapes. 

“If we look at the logic of the real estate market, discovering over the last 15, 20 years that the corridor-accessed apartment building at 120 and 200 units-plus optimizes the building code to maximize returns, there is a smaller ‘missing middle’ type that I’ve become maybe a little bit obsessed about, which is the 12-unit single-stair building,” said Love, who conducted a geospatial analysis that revealed 5,000 sites in the Boston area that were perfect for a 12-unit building. 

“Five thousand times twelve is a lot of housing,” Love said. “If we came up with 5,000 sites within walking distance of a transit stop, that’s a pretty good story to get out and a good place to start.” 

Another dilemma of density is that while big increases in multifamily housing supply theoretically should have a downward impact on prices, many individual dense development projects in hot housing markets are often quite expensive. Dixon, who is currently writing a book about density and Main Streets, said the way to combat gentrification associated with density is to require a portion of units to be affordable, and to capture increases in the value of urban land to create more affordability. 

“If we have policies in place so that value doesn’t all go to the [owners of the] underlying land and we can tap those premiums, that is a way to finance affordable housing,” he said. “In other words, when we use density to create places that are more valuable because they can be walkable, mixed-use, lively, community-rich, amenitized, all these good things, we … owe it to ourselves to tap some of that value to create affordability so that everybody can live there.” 

Visualizing Density can be found at the Lincoln Institute website at https://www.lincolninst.edu/data/visualizing-density/. 

Listen to the show here or subscribe to Land Matters on  Apple Podcasts, Spotify,  Stitcher, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

 


Further reading 

Visualizing Density | Lincoln Institute

What Does 15 Units Per Acre Look Like? A StoryMap Exploring Street-Level Density | Land Lines

Why We Need Walkable Density for Cities to Thrive | Public Square

The Density Conundrum: Bringing the 15-Minute City to Texas | Urban Land

The Density Dilemma: Appeal and Obstacles for Compact and Transit Oriented Development | Anthony Flint

 


Anthony Flint is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, host of the Land Matters podcast, and a contributing editor of Land Lines. 

Oportunidades de becas de posgrado

2025–2026 Programa de becas para el máster UNED-Instituto Lincoln

Fecha límite para postular: October 10, 2025 at 11:59 PM

El Instituto Lincoln de Políticas de Suelo y la Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED) ofrecen el máster en Políticas de Suelo y Desarrollo Urbano Sostenible, un programa académico online en español que reúne de manera única los marcos legales y herramientas que sostienen la planificación urbana, junto con instrumentos fiscales, ambientales y de participación, desde una perspectiva internacional y comparada.

El máster está dirigido especialmente a estudiantes de posgrado y otros graduados con interés en políticas urbanas desde una perspectiva jurídica, ambiental y de procesos de participación, así como a funcionarios públicos. Los participantes del programa recibirán el entrenamiento teórico y técnico para liderar la implementación de medidas que permitan la transformación sostenible de las ciudades.

Plazo de matrícula ordinario: del 8 de septiembre al 28 de noviembre de 2025

El inicio del máster es en enero de 2026.  La fecha exacta se anunciará antes del 28 de noviembre de 2025.

El Instituto Lincoln otorgará becas que cubrirán parcialmente el costo del máster de los postulantes seleccionados.

Términos de las becas: 

  • Los becarios deben haber obtenido un título de licenciatura de una institución académica o de estudios superiores. 
  • Los fondos de las becas no tienen valor en efectivo y solo cubrirán el 40 % del costo total del programa. 
  • Los becarios deben pagar la primera cuota de la matrícula, que representa el 60 % del costo total del máster. 
  • Los becarios deben mantener una buena posición académica o perderán el beneficio. 

El otorgamiento de la beca dependerá de la admisión formal del postulante al máster UNED-Instituto Lincoln. 

Si son seleccionados, los becarios recibirán asistencia virtual para realizar el proceso de admisión de la Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), el cual requiere una solicitud online y una copia del expediente académico o registro de calificaciones de licenciatura y/o posgrado. 

Aquellos postulantes que no obtengan la beca parcial del Instituto Lincoln podrán optar a las ayudas que ofrece la UNED, una vez que se hayan matriculado en el máster. 

Fecha límite para postular: 10 de octubre de 2025, 23:59 horas de Boston, MA, EUA (UTC-5) 

Anuncio de resultados: 22 de octubre 2025 


Detalles

Fecha límite para postular
October 10, 2025 at 11:59 PM

Palabras clave

mitigación climática, desarrollo, resolución de conflictos, gestión ambiental, zonificación excluyente, Favela, Henry George, mercados informales de suelo, infraestructura, regulación del mercado de suelo, especulación del suelo, uso de suelo, planificación de uso de suelo, valor del suelo, tributación del valor del suelo, impuesto a base de suelo, gobierno local, mediación, salud fiscal municipal, planificación, tributación inmobilaria, finanzas públicas, políticas públicas, regímenes regulatorios, resiliencia, reutilización de suelo urbano, desarrollo urbano, urbanismo, recuperación de plusvalías

Grabaciones de webinarios y eventos

Land Use and Transportation Scenario Planning in Greater Boston

Octubre 16, 2025 | 12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. (EDT, UTC-4)

Offered in inglés

Watch the Recording


The Consortium for Scenario Planning is hosting a peer exchange featuring Sarah Philbrick and Conor Gately from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), who will discuss their summer 2025 project conducting four land use scenarios using a travel demand model to understand the impact of different transit-oriented development (TOD) strategies on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Greater Boston.

Local and regional planners, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), professionals, and community members interested in learning more about land use and transportation planning and how TOD strategies impact GHG emissions are invited to tune in to this webinar. Simultaneous English-Spanish translation will be available via Zoom. If you would like to use the translation service, please join the webinar five minutes early.


Speakers

Sarah Philbrick

Research Manager, MAPC

Conor Gately

Senior Land Use and Transportation Analyst, MAPC


Detalles

Fecha(s)
Octubre 16, 2025
Time
12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. (EDT, UTC-4)
Registration Period
Agosto 19, 2025 - Octubre 16, 2025
Idioma
inglés

Palabras clave

infraestructura, uso de suelo, planificación de uso de suelo, contaminación, planificación de escenarios, desarrollo orientado a transporte

The Lincoln Institute Announces Recipients of the 2025–26 International Research for the Study of China’s Urban Development and Land Policy Program

By Kristina McGeehan, Julio 21, 2025

CAMBRIDGE, MA – The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy has announced three individuals are receiving a research commission for the 202526 International Research for the Study of China’s Urban Development and Land Policy program.  The recipients are based outside mainland China and each received $35,000 to fund their research. This year’s recipients—Maurizio Marinelli, Andrew Waxman, and Fangxin Yi—submitted proposals for academic and policy research papers addressing land, urban, fiscal, and environmental issues relating to urbanization in China.  

Maurizio Marinelli is a professor of China and Global Prosperity at University College London’s Institute for Global Prosperity. His project, “Urban Regeneration of Historical Street Markets in Hong Kong: The Role of Community Engagement in Socio-Spatial Reconfiguration,” examines the socio-spatial politics of land redevelopment and displacement in Hong Kong through the lens of street markets. The goal of this research is to find and promote community-led solutions that help cities ethically navigate economic instability. 

Andrew Waxman, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin’s Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, submitted “A Long Way from Home: Migration and Commuting in Urban China.” In this project, Waxman studies how high-speed rail (HSR) affects commuting, housing costs, and wage disparities. His research aims to provide policy guidance to enhance economic access for underserved workers and regions. 

Fangxin Yi, a research assistant professor at the Division of Public Policy at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, examines what links fiscal decentralization, regional inequality, and land-centered urbanization in China since the 1994 Tax-Sharing Reform. Her project, “Fiscal Decentralization and the Strategic Embedding of Land-Centered Urbanization: Three Decades Under the Tax-Sharing System,” seeks to understand the effects of decentralizing tax revenue collection and rebalancing spending responsibilities between the central and local governments. 

“The purpose of this program is to promote international scholarly dialogue on China’s urban development and land policy,” said Zhi Liu, the program’s director. “The development of this program will aid in the Lincoln Institute’s objective to advance land policy solutions to economic, social, and environmental challenges.” 

The International Research for the Study of China’s Urban Development and Land Policy program accepts applications from academic researchers working on the following topics in China: land use, carbon neutrality, and spatial planning and governance; urban regeneration; municipal finance and land value capture; impacts of new urbanization; land policies; housing policies; urban environment and public health; and land and water conservation. The program is offered annually by the Lincoln Institute, and applications for the 202627 cycle will open in fall 2025.  

In Denver, Mike Johnston Confronts Success: The City’s Popularity Has Made It Pricey

July 9, 2025

By Anthony Flint, July 9, 2025

 

Mike Johnston, a one-time high school English teacher, has been overseeing a significant boom in one of the most prominent cities in the Intermountain West. Denver has been attracting people and businesses with its temperate climate and outdoorsy quality of life, but this popularity has also caused growing pains, starting with increasingly high housing costs, homelessness, and recently some significant municipal budget woes.

Johnston has tackled the challenges one by one, beginning with a permitting process overhaul, steps to reduce costs in building, and tax abatements and other incentives, like a density bonus, to encourage more construction.

“We have a lot of people that want to move to Denver. That’s driving a lot of economic growth. We’re thrilled about it. It also drives lots of housing demand,” Johnston said in an interview for the Mayor’s Desk series, recorded on the Land Matters podcast. “The overarching theme is, we have to add a lot more housing supply.”

In the wide-ranging interview, Johnston also reflected on his aggressive campaign to clear out homeless encampments in the city. As part of this effort, officials have provided customized relocations to private transitional housing units with services and support for the unhoused.

“When you have high cost of housing cities, you get more people who can’t afford to pay that cost. That is just a mathematical fact. And so that means many of the cities that are growing and are in high demand, like the Denvers, or the San Franciscos, or the Austins, or Seattles, are the places where we see this struggle.”

The strategy of individualized housing solutions, while expensive, has been working, he said. “We think it can work for other cities, and we’ll share these lessons with anyone who’s willing to take them on, because we think we should set the expectation in every American city that street homelessness can be a solvable problem.”

He also expressed confidence that the state and the metropolitan region will have continued success fighting climate change, as federal policy backs away from addressing that global crisis. He said incentives for electrification, electric vehicle infrastructure, and energy-efficiency upgrades like heat pumps are contributing to the city’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2040.

“We don’t want to make it too expensive to do business in Denver, and yet we still want to be aggressively committed to hitting climate goals,” he said. “People do care. And there’s a lot we can do,” such as encouraging residents to take more trips by bike or walking, or to consolidate trips made in single occupancy vehicles.

“We want to encourage people to take more local action now, in the face of federal abandonment of [climate action] … we’ll keep setting our own targets for how our vehicles, our businesses, and our residents try to hit aggressive climate goals, knowing that we’re still all in this together, even if the President doesn’t want to make it a priority.”

Being mayor is the latest step in a professional journey that began with teaching English in the Mississippi Delta. From there, Johnston returned to Colorado to become a school principal, leading three different schools in the Denver Metro area. In 2009 he was elected to the Colorado State Senate, where he served two terms representing Northeast Denver. He was also a senior education advisor to President Obama and CEO of Gary Community Ventures, a philanthropic organization, where he led coalitions to pass the state’s first plan for universal preschool and spearheaded efforts to fund affordable housing and address homelessness statewide. He lives in East Denver with his wife Courtney, who is a chief deputy district attorney, and their three children.

Johnston, 50, was part of the Lincoln Institute mayor’s panel at the American Planning Association’s National Planning Conference in Denver this spring, along with Aaron Brockett and Jeni Arndt, mayors of the Colorado cities of Boulder and Fort Collins, respectively. Senior Fellow Anthony Flint caught up with him several weeks later for this interview, which will also be available in print and online in Land Lines magazine.

Listen to the show here or subscribe to Land Matters on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

 


Further reading

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston’s latest affordable housing strategy: tax rebates for developers | Denverite

Will Denverites Come Back to the Newly Renovated 16th Street? | 5280

Opinion: Denver Parking Minimums Increase Housing Costs | Westword

Mayor says downtown Denver has made a ‘dramatic change’ | Denverite

Denver City Hall Takes a Page from NASA to Tackle Housing Barriers |  Bloomberg CityLab

Zoning Report: Colorado | National Zoning Atlas

Who Should Pay to Fix the Sidewalk? | Bloomberg CityLab

 


Anthony Flint is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, host of the Land Matters podcast, and a contributing editor of Land Lines.


Transcript

Anthony Flint: Welcome back to land matters, the podcast of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. I’m your host, Anthony Flint. On this show, we’re continuing our Mayor’s Desk series –- our Q&A’s with municipal chief executives from around the world — with Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, who was inaugurated as the 46th mayor of that city pretty much 2 years ago this summer in July 2023. It’s fair to say he’s been overseeing a significant boom in one of the most prominent cities in the Intermountain West, which has been attracting people and business with its temperate climate and outdoorsy quality of life. Yet Denver has had its growing pains, too, with increasingly high housing costs. We see modest bungalows in several neighborhoods in Denver, easily selling for a million dollars or more … a not-unrelated homelessness problem, and recently some significant municipal budget woes.

Mayor Johnson started his career as a high school English teacher in the Mississippi Delta, and returned home to Colorado to become a school principal, leading 3 different schools in the Denver Metro area. He later served as a senior education advisor to President Obama. In 2009 he was elected to the Colorado State Senate, where he served 2 terms representing Northeast Denver, working on issues, including immigration, gun safety and the clean energy transition. He later served as the CEO of Gary Community Ventures, a local philanthropic organization where he led coalitions to pass the State’s 1st plan for universal preschool and spearheaded efforts to fund affordable housing and address homelessness statewide. Mayor Johnston grew up in Colorado, speaks Spanish and lives in East Denver with his wife Courtney, who is a chief deputy district attorney and their 3 kids. Your honor, thank you for joining the conversation at Land Matters, and being part of the Mayor’s Desk series.

Mayor Mike Johnston: I’m delighted to be on. Thank you so much for having me.

Anthony Flint: Well, as I mentioned in the intro, like a lot of booming metropolitan regions, Denver is facing down a housing affordability problem. So, first question, what are the key elements for addressing this crisis?

Mayor Mike Johnston: You bet, Anthony, and again thank you for having me, and I think the opening frame for me which you mentioned … My dad used to say, the only thing worse than being hated is being loved, you know, and what we know for Denver is, we do have folks from all over the country and all over the world who want to move to Denver. And that is a great problem to have. I have friends who are mayors and cities facing very different challenges, which is declining populations and lots of vacant buildings, because people don’t want to move there. Denver is now, I think, the number 2 desired destination for people under age 30 in the United States. And so we have a lot of people that want to move to Denver. That’s driving a lot of economic growth. We’re thrilled about it. It also drives lots of housing demand.

So for us there are three big top priorities here. The overarching theme is, we have to add a lot more housing supply, as you know, but we think there are three ways to do that. One is to make it faster to build housing for us. That means an aggressive strategy on permitting reform to make our permitting system go from what was a two and a half to three-year process to now, what will be a commitment from us to have every permit only take 180 days of time in the city’s hands. We created a new citywide permitting office that unifies all of the functions of permitting that were spread across seven departments, now into one director, who reports directly to me so part of that is making it easier to build in Denver.

The second is reducing the costs of building wherever we can. And so we’re doing that, obviously making the process faster. Reduce the cost. But also we’re doing more to provide our own tax abatements and our own tax programs. We launched a middle class housing strategy this week. That’s focused on providing property tax abatements for up to 10 years in exchange for a 30 year, commitment on deed, restricted affordability for people that are middle class Denverites who need to be able to afford to live in the city. So we think those incentives matter. And then, of course, we are investing more in affordable housing. We know that the city can’t solve this alone, and the market can’t solve it alone. We need a partnership where we will invest city resources into projects where we can be hopefully a smaller and smaller part of the capital stack. But just enough of the stack to be able to buy long-term affordability in the form of deed restrictions. And so for us, it’s making the city build faster. It’s making costs cheaper. And it’s making more public investment with really clear public goals. We’ve set a clear public goal to bring on 3,000 affordable units every year, and provide access for 3,000 households to affordable units every year. That’s about twice the rate what the city was bringing on before we got into office. And so we know we have to be really aggressive about bringing on a lot more housing, a lot more quickly and a lot more affordably.

Anthony Flint: Your campaign to address homeless encampments in Denver triggered a little bit of backlash, including some criticism of the expense. Can you explain your approach, and how it might apply to other cities? And is there anything you would do differently?

Mayor Mike Johnston: Yeah, I think this is one that we are really excited about, because I think many Americans have given into the belief that homelessness is an unsolvable problem that we are just stuck with this as a component of modern life. And, as you said accurately, Anthony, what we know is homelessness exists in the greatest acuity in cities, not because there’s high rates of poverty, not because there’s high rates of unemployment, not because of the political ideology of those cities. It exists in direct correlation to the cost of housing. In those cities. When you have high cost of housing cities, you get more people who can’t afford to pay that cost. That is just a mathematical fact. And so that means many of the cities that are growing and are in high demand, like the Denver’s, or the San Francisco’s, or the Austins, or Seattle’s, are the places where we see this struggle. But what we have really seen is that this is a problem that can be solved by addressing those core needs. And so I’ll lead with the headline that … we set an ambitious goal to try to end street homelessness in my 1st term. Four years. That seems impossible. Well, I’ll tell you, we’re two years in right now, and we have now reduced our street homelessness in Denver by 45% in a little less than two years. That is … the largest reduction of street homelessness in any city in American history, over two years, of which we’re very proud. But it’s also a clear sign that halfway through the term. We’re halfway on the path of that goal. We think other cities should be ambitious. And believing that this is a solvable problem, let me talk about the way we’ve done this, which we think is also really scalable.

What we’ve done is first really focused on bringing on what we call transitional housing units which are dignified, individual private units. A lot of these are hotels we’ve bought and converted. They’re tiny home villages that we’ve built. But critically, it’s not shelter like sleeping on a gym floor with 100 people on a mat. It is a place where you have a locked door. You have privacy, you have access to showers and bathrooms and kitchens. You can store your stuff when you go to work for the day.

And we brought on wraparound services on each of these sites. So our first big effort was to bring on 1,000 units of transitional housing, you know, like many cities, previous Administration fought this battle, and took 2 or 3 years to fight, to put one tiny home village of about 40 units into one neighborhood with a number of lawsuits. We said, we have to bring on units at the scale of the problems. We brought on a thousand units, and (over) six months I did 60 town halls all across the city, talking to neighbors and all of those locations about why this would make such a big difference. We put wraparound services — mental health addiction, support, workforce training, long-term housing navigation — on each of those sites. So people don’t have to always return just to downtown to get those services. And once we brought those units on, then we went geographically to the places where encampments existed in Denver, and instead of sweeping those encampments from block to block, where they just show up in front of someone else’s house or someone else’s church or hospital, we would actually go to those encampments and resolve them. We would close that encampment entirely by moving all 50 people or 100 people. In one case we had almost 200 people in one encampment, closing those encampments, resolving them, moving all those folks into housing, and then importantly keeping that block or that region of the city permanently closed to future camping. So the result is, two years in, we’ve now closed every encampment in the city. We haven’t had a single tent inside of our downtown business district for more than a year and a half we have cut family homelessness by 83%. We’ve become the largest city ever to end street homelessness for veterans. We have no veterans anymore on the streets who can’t get access to housing, and, importantly, anyone can walk down any street or sidewalk or public park, and none of them have tents or encampments in them, so we’ve both made sure there’s a real change in the experience for residents of Denver and those people who are most at risk of starving to death, freezing to death, overdosing on the streets … we moved off of the streets into transitional housing that has really worked for us. We think it can work for other cities, and we’ll share these lessons with anyone who’s willing to take them on, because we think we should set the expectation in every American city that street homelessness can be a solvable problem.

Anthony Flint: Are you satisfied with the number of people using this very impressive and extensive light rail network in Denver Metro, and the number of people living essentially in transit oriented development? Or is the system facing growing pains, and if so, why? A related question … any lessons learned from the relatively light ridership on the free bus on the 16th Street Transit Mall, which is finally concluding its renovation after long delays? But first the light rail network, transit-oriented development … How is it going.

Mayor Mike Johnston: As you, said, Anthony, we’re not satisfied yet, and that is because, as you know, transit and housing have to be connected strategies. Housing is a transit strategy. If you’re mindful about actually building housing and building density of housing around our public transit networks. And so we had this great transit network built. We did not have density of housing around any of those spots. And so what we’re doing now is undertaking a series of very large catalytic investments in a number of areas around the city that are on these light rail lines. So we can build thousands and thousands of units of housing along that corridor. We just, for instance, acquired the largest piece of private property in city history to turn into a public park. It will be a 155-acre park. It is right next to a light rail stop, so we can now add housing and housing density all around that site — beautiful location, and people can get on light rail and get right to downtown or do a Broncos game or anything else. We just won a franchise expansion, the one franchise expansion for the National Women’s Soccer League, and so we’ll have a new women’s soccer franchise. We’re building a new women’s soccer stadium also at a TOD site that we’ll have on that campus … a lot of dense housing commercial activities also connected to public transit. We’re rebuilding our stock show in a historically Latino part of North Denver — Globeville, Elyria, Swansea — that’ll allow us to add about 60 acres of new housing, public spaces, commercial activation also all on public transit. So our belief is, you have to actually be deliberate about building real density around your public transit as much as you want to build your public transit around well traveled lines of travel in the city. And so that’s a big part of our strategy. When we add that density, we know most of the major cities like ours that aren’t yet a New York, or a DC, with a full functioning subway line. You can’t just throw in that infrastructure and hope the city accommodates because people have lots of places to go to. You have to build nodes of real density around the city. So even though you might have 3 or 4 different jobs over the next 10 years, those jobs can be concentrated among different regions, and your housing can, and your activities can (as well). So that’s our big strategy around that. And you’ll see us make historic investments in doing that in the next couple of years.

But a part of that is downtown, is our downtown strategy. And you mentioned our 16th Street bus that we have, that’s free downtown. We’re making the largest investment in our downtown, also of any city in the country, per capita. Right now, about $600 million through a tax increment financing system that will focus on one getting more people to live downtown. We want downtown to be a neighborhood, not just a business district. And so we’re going to add about 4,000 units of housing in our city center, using these funds that we have from our downtown Denver authority, because we know that means more people that will use that bus every day that we’ll get to and from work they will go to see friends. So that’s a big part of our strategy. We’re working on filling up about 7 million square feet of vacant office space — like many cities, have about 4 million of that, we will use with residential conversion. We think one of the most ambitious residential conversion plans in the country. The other 3 million we’ll use by bringing people back to the office, recruiting businesses to come downtown, stay downtown, we think the more we activate that location the more folks will use the public transit, and the more people can use the connected public transit of coming from a neighborhood in East Denver or North Denver, take the light rail down to downtown, use the 16th Street ride to get up and down 16th Street … we have the second largest theater complex in the country off of Broadway. We have 5 professional sports franchises in our city center. We have Michelin Star restaurants. We’ll have the Sundance film festival coming to Colorado. There’s so much to be attracted to seeing. We want to make it easy to get to downtown and around downtown, and this will do that.

Anthony Flint: Given the current municipal fiscal challenges in Denver, what is your thinking about alternative financing systems such as a land value tax or value capture, as seen in the 38th & Blake incentive overlay? I’m hoping you might explain the concept as you see it and how or whether its rationale makes sense to you.

Mayor Mike Johnston: We are interested in every incentive we can find to encourage folks to build more housing. The 38th and Blake overlay was really kind of a density bonus, where we allow folks to build higher buildings than what the zoning might allow in exchange for adding more affordable housing, and we are always looking at ways to incentivize folks to add more affordable housing. So we’re delighted to do that. I think that also links to the program I described briefly which is our our middle class housing program we launched yesterday, which is also focused on a property tax abatement. We’ll offer up to 10 years of property tax abatement for people that are going to build middle class affordable housing. So think about that as people making sixty to a hundred thousand a year as an individual … and that’s about a 10 year property tax abatement for a 30-year commitment of affordability. So that’s a great deal for us. We’re also looking at partnership on places where we have public land. We’re looking at working with city-owned land, working with Denver public schools where they have land, our regional transit system, if they have land. And so we’re always looking to contribute public land as a way to incentivize more affordability. But we want to do a all of the above strategy. But wherever we can add more housing without having to invest more dollars in these fiscal times that’s a big help

[Re-stated] Our belief is we want to do an all of the above strategy on every way we can incentivize people to build more affordable housing. So for us, that means we want to use city land. Whenever we can do that, we’ll use public land to be able to incentivize a deal. We’ll partner with other public agencies like the Denver public schools, or like the regional transit system or the State. That’s always a great way for us to incentivize. And that’s why we’ve used strategies like this middle class housing program we launched, which is a property tax abatement where folks can get 10 years of property tax abatement for a 30 year, commitment of deed, restricted affordability through a special limited partnership. So we’re going to use every strategy we have, particularly in tough economic times, and you don’t have big new dollars to invest in supporting affordable housing. We have to find other creative ways and density. Bonuses are a great way, and we’ll keep doing that as well as everything else we can.

Anthony Flint: Finally, how would you assess the progress of your climate action plans which I see includes incentives for electrification, electric vehicle infrastructure, hot and cold weather heat pumps, energy efficiency … Do you see a tangible embrace at the local level for addressing climate change, especially in the context of retrenchment at the federal level. I mean, just as a practical matter, the federal government is getting out of the climate business. So can cities and states take that over and be effective?

Mayor Mike Johnston: We don’t see any change at all in our city’s commitment to climate action or our conviction that this is a still existentially important effort for us to undertake. And so we are not slowing down at all. We’re not changing our path, and what we are doing is trying to make sure we’re committed to an aggressive vision to meet our climate goals, which for us is a 2040 plan to be entirely carbon free by 2040, to have 100% renewable energy. And also to make sure we’re driving economic growth. We want to do both. And so we don’t want to make it too expensive to do business in Denver, and yet we still want to be aggressively committed to hitting climate goals. And we’re doing that. We’ve done things like we had, I think, one of the nation-leading efforts on making our commercial buildings more energy efficient through a program we have called Energize Denver. We also had concerns from the business community about how to comply with the cost to make those adjustments to buildings. And so we spent a lot of time with our landowners and building owners and business leaders, and we revised that plan to both decrease the penalties, extend the amount of time folks can comply, put a cap on the overall amount of changes they have to make, which drops the cost dramatically for our business partners, but still keeps us on path to hit aggressive 2040 climate goals. So people do care. And there’s a lot we can do. There’s behavior change. We’re doing a whole campaign on behavior change, to encourage folks to take more trips by bike or walking … Can they consolidate or condense the number of single occupancy vehicle trips that they take. And so part of it is about awareness. Part of it’s about behavior change and part of it’s about a good policy on things like banning plastic bags. Obviously, and being able to incentivize more and more solar and wind. So we think this is purely a part of Denver’s brand. We want to be able to be a great city and a good city. We want to be able to have a great economy, and also have great connection to the natural environment of the outdoors. And so for us, it’s it’s good climate and good business, and we’ll continue to do both.

Anthony Flint: And local and state government taking this over, are you optimistic about that? The question is, can they really take this over, a planet-wide issue, and really be effective.

Mayor Mike Johnston: I think we don’t believe that we should give up here or step away. Our campaign, we call, do more or do less, but do something, whether it’s going to do more in the way of recycling, or less in the way of using a single occupancy vehicle or doing something in terms of being able to make decisions about where and how you use energy. We want to encourage people to take more local action now, in the face of federal abandonment of this. The things that we’ll need help on are the things that made a big difference. The federal tax credits on electrical vehicle purchases — those are big drivers of behavior change. I sponsored when I was in the Senate a state credit that does the same thing — provide incentives, tax incentives for electric vehicle purchases. Here we’re building out aggressively, charging station infrastructure to make it easier for us to convert our fleet vehicles to be electric to get more Ubers and Lyfts and Fedexes and Amazons and UPS (vehicles) to do the same. And to convince regular residents do the same. So we’ll keep building the infrastructure to do this. We’ll keep incentivizing people to do it. We’ll keep changing behavior to do it, and we’ll keep setting our own targets for how our vehicles, our businesses, and our residents try to hit aggressive climate goals, knowing that we’re still all in this together, even if the President doesn’t want to make it a priority.

Anthony Flint: Mike Johnston, Mayor of Denver, Colorado. Thank you once again for this conversation.

Mayor Mike Johnston: Thanks so much for having me, Anthony. It’s great to meet you.

Anthony Flint: You can learn more about all the issues we covered — strategies for affordable housing, sustainable urbanism, transit-oriented development, value capture, and of course, the challenge of climate change, pursuing both mitigation and resilience — all of that and more at the Lincoln Institute website, www.lincolninst.edu. While you’re there, scroll to the bottom and join our mailing list to get periodic updates on our work. And also on social media, the handle is @landpolicy. Finally, don’t forget to rate, share and subscribe to the Land Matters podcast. For now, I’m Anthony Flint, signing off until next time.

Read full transcript
June 4, 2025

By Anthony Flint, June 4, 2025

 

After more than three decades promoting compact, mixed-use, transit-oriented development, the Congress for the New Urbanism is banking on a future in which demand for walkable urbanism is stronger than ever.

So says Mallory Baches, the current president of the organization. CNU splashed onto the scene in the early 1990s with a goal of stopping—or slowing—suburban and exurban sprawl. Since then, some of its most successful activity has happened behind the scenes, as the group highlighted how outdated zoning, codes, and land use regulations make it impossible to build the town centers and village greens that many people want.

“CNU has made important progress. Many more people want the alternative of great urbanism,” Baches said in an interview on the Land Matters podcast. “But we also know a lot more of what stands in the way of achieving that vision. We know that regulations at every level of governance make it illegal to build some of the great urbanism that the general public wants. We also know that the cost of great urbanism makes it increasingly inaccessible.

“When the original founding generation of this movement was first trying to describe what they were working to achieve, every system that impacted the built environment was an obstacle,” Baches said. “The enemy was everywhere. Every single thing that you had to consider when trying to create walkable urbanism was something you had to overcome.”

The interview comes as hundreds of architects, transportation planners, developers, elected officials, and others gather for the 33rd Congress for the New Urbanism in Providence, Rhode Island—a city that has embraced many of the group’s principles, such as adaptive reuse, freeway rerouting, and human-centered placemaking.

Contemplating the future of an organization that has been active for so long, Baches said her colleagues remain true to the original vision, while navigating an increasingly turbulent political environment in which many initiatives are out of favor with the federal government. The Trump administration has rolled back funding for housing, the dismantling of urban freeways, and clean energy manufacturing projects that were seeding economic regeneration in legacy cities.

“These are drastic shifts, especially at the federal policy and funding level, but also … in some state conditions as well,” she said. “I just remind myself that over three decades CNU … has seen changes in rhetoric and in leadership, in priorities, in the market, in the economic conditions of where we are doing this work. I remember [during] the Great Recession, I was attempting to continue my [planning] practice, and it required a lot of adaptation.

“What I don’t want to lose sight of [is that while] rethinking our strategy is responsible … what we believe in is not on the table. We know what we’re aiming toward. We may have to adapt how we get toward that, but the fact of the matter is any sort of binary view of conservative or liberal, or red state or blue state, is a vast simplification of what it looks like to try and achieve this vision in any given community.”

The preamble to the Charter of the New Urbanism says the group “views disinvestment in central cities, the spread of placeless sprawl, increasing separation by race and income, environmental deterioration, loss of agricultural lands and wilderness—and the erosion of society’s built heritage—as one interrelated community-building challenge.”

Mallory Baches is in her second year leading the Congress for the New Urbanism. She started out in the field of city planning and urban design with the firm Duany Plater–Zyberk & Company, and continued on with her own urban design practice, creating greenfield and infill masterplans, architectural and adaptive reuse concept designs, urban and architectural codes, and associated design guidelines.

She holds a Bachelor of Architecture from the University of Notre Dame and a Master of Science in Sustainable Urban Development from the University of Oxford, and was also a fellow at the University of Miami School of Architecture. She is accredited with the American Planning Association and the US Green Building Council.

Listen to the show here or subscribe to Land Matters on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

 


Further Reading

New leadership at CNU | Traditional Building

Freeways without Futures | CNU Public Square

Building Housing in Walkable Neighborhoods: Are US Cities and States Making Progress? | Terner Center for Housing Innovation

Study Shows Widespread New Urbanist Zoning Reform | CNU Public Square

CNU Returns to Providence | Architecture Here and There

 


Anthony Flintisa senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, host of theLand Matters podcast, and a contributing editor of Land Lines.

 

Grabaciones de webinarios y eventos

How Disaster Policies Lead to Manufactured Housing Policy Disasters

Junio 3, 2025 | 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. (EDT, UTC-4)

Offered in inglés

Watch the Recording


Mobile and manufactured housing communities (MHCs) are often some of the hardest hit by flooding disasters, and the disaster vulnerability of this housing type stems from a confluence of titling, financing, and flood mitigation policies. These policies have centered single-family real property homes while explicitly excluding MHC homeowners—over time pushing these communities into floodplains and barring them from mitigation or recovery mechanisms.

This webinar will utilize recent geospatial data from a 12-county sample in Colorado to shed light on the policies that create disproportionate flood exposure and exacerbate barriers to flood recovery, basic home maintenance, and weatherization in MHCs. The webinar will conclude with a discussion about potential policy interventions at the state, local, and federal level.

 


 

Speakers

Dani Slabaugh, PhD MLA (they/them), is a community-based researcher based at the University of Colorado Denver utilizing qualitative, quantitative, and geospatial methods to further climate and environmental justice goals in planning and public policy. Their background in mutual aid disaster recovery after multiple hurricane and flood events led them to pursue a PhD focused on climate justice research in collaboration with mobile home park resident activists and community leaders in Colorado. Their work centers impacted communities’ visions of a just and thriving climate future through transformative change.

Rachel Siegel is a senior officer with The Pew Charitable Trust’s housing policy initiative, conducting original research and analysis on the availability, safety, and affordability of mortgages and on alternative financial arrangements for purchasing manufactured homes and other low-cost forms of housing. She has also worked on Pew’s consumer banking and finance teams focusing on overdraft, prepaid cards, and mobile payments. Siegel holds a bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Vermont and a master’s in economics from Boston University.


Detalles

Fecha(s)
Junio 3, 2025
Time
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. (EDT, UTC-4)
Registration Deadline
June 3, 2025 3:59 PM
Idioma
inglés

Palabras clave

medio ambiente, uso de suelo, diseño urbano