RESEARCH PAPER PRESENTATION
Balancing green and compact city: Assessing the quality of residential surroundings
This comparative article examines whether compact urban development reduces the quality of residential green infrastructure, using multifamily housing estates in Poznan and Copenhagen as case studies. It is relevant to urban planners, housing policymakers, and sustainability practitioners interested in densification, biodiversity, and livable neighborhood design.
The size of residential green space does not by itself determine its ecological, recreational, or environmental quality, and compact city development can be successfully combined with high-quality green infrastructure.
The authors investigate whether denser multifamily housing environments necessarily compromise the quality of nearby green spaces. Focusing on selected estates in Poznan and Copenhagen, they compare quantitative measures such as area and density with qualitative indicators including biodiversity, accessibility, multifunctionality, and social amenities. The paper weighs a simple area-based understanding of greenery against a broader conception of quality rooted in design and planning practice.
The problem
Cities face a persistent tension between densification and the provision of accessible, high-quality green space, especially in multifamily housing areas where residents rely heavily on nearby outdoor environments. While compact development can reduce sprawl and emissions, it can also diminish everyday access to nature and undermine health, biodiversity, and social well-being if green infrastructure is poorly designed. This matters as European cities continue to build new housing under pressure to meet both sustainability and livability goals.
Key findings
Although Poznan’s estates often contained more total green area, much of that space was dominated by lawns and offered lower ecological and recreational value. Copenhagen’s denser estates delivered higher-quality and more multifunctional greenery through diverse planting, rain gardens, community spaces, and more accessible natural playgrounds. The comparison shows that green space quality is not captured by area alone, and that integrated planning can support both compactness and livability.
105 m² per person
Strzeszyn in Poznan had the highest total greenery per capita among the studied estates, compared with 14 m² per person in Ørestad.
13,499/km²
Ørestad had the highest population density of all case studies, illustrating Copenhagen’s substantially more compact urban form.
7,201.7 m² vs 3,746.7 m²
Average high greenery area in Danish estates was nearly double that of Polish estates, indicating a stronger presence of taller vegetation.
3.25%–7.35% vs 12.96%–24.44%
Copenhagen estates devoted a much smaller share of outdoor space to surface parking than Poznan estates, freeing more room for public and ecological functions.
What cities should do
Cities should move beyond minimum green-area quotas and prioritize multifunctional, biodiverse, and accessible residential greenery in dense housing developments. Planning frameworks should promote rainwater retention, naturalistic planting, community gardens, green roofs, and publicly accessible social spaces, while limiting excessive surface parking and fragmented plot-by-plot development. Stronger governance and participatory planning can help align compact growth with climate resilience, biodiversity, and everyday quality of life.
Implementation Approach
The paper points to an implementation approach centered on integrated planning, stronger local standards, and neighborhood-scale design that evaluates greenery by function and quality rather than size alone. It recommends combining spatial analysis with on-site qualitative assessment to guide housing development toward greener, more socially inclusive compact urban form.
Years 1-2
Adopt or strengthen local planning rules that require multifunctional green infrastructure, minimum quality standards, and reduced reliance on surface parking in new multifamily developments.
Years 2-3
Map residential estates at neighborhood scale to assess land cover, greenery types, accessibility, and opportunities for blue-green infrastructure and community spaces.
Years 3-4
Retrofit and design estates with diverse plantings, rain gardens, green roofs, natural playgrounds, and social meeting areas tailored to resident needs.
Years 4-5
Integrate community gardening, public access provisions, and participatory management practices to improve stewardship, inclusion, and everyday use of green spaces.
Ongoing
Monitor not only green area totals but also biodiversity, maintenance intensity, usability, and ecosystem-service performance to refine planning and management over time.
Ready for more?
Explore additional presentations that complement this one
Green Space at New Housing Estates in Poznan: Flat Price Versus Accessibility to Good Quality Greenery
This case study examines the relationship between the price of flats and the quality of residential greenery in new housing estates in Poznan, Poland, showing that cheaper flats may offer equal or better access to quality green spaces compared to more expensive ones.
Read moreGreen Space Quality vs. Flat Price in New Housing Estates
This study examines the relationship between the price of apartments and the quality and accessibility of green spaces in new housing estates in Poznań, Poland, revealing that less prestigious developments often provide similar or better greenery than pricier estates.
Read moreTowards a pattern language for green space design in high density urban developments
This article proposes a systematic framework for designing urban green space in high-density developments using a pattern language approach. It is relevant to urban designers, planners, landscape architects, and policymakers seeking to balance ecosystem services, biodiversity, and space constraints in compact cities.
Read more