Another approach is to use color-coded squares that represent a fixed land area with different land uses and associated jobs or dwelling unit densities. In this version of the game, the map has a grid overlay so that only one square can be placed in each grid cell. The group is given an initial set of squares representing densities that would meet the needs of projected growth. One person acts as the “banker” and swaps out squares of different densities and land uses. For example, if the table decides that it would like to develop at a density of one unit an acre instead of five units an acre, it can switch one chip with five units per acre for five chips with one unit per acre each. The group can also designate areas for open space, choose sites for schools based on population distribution, and place commercial property in areas it deems most appropriate.

When citizens are asked to determine where growth should go, they are faced with the tradeoffs required in determining density, land use, transportation, proximity to services, and the myriad considerations that go into planning for growth. Participants at each table debate and come to agreement on issues such as density versus land consumption, distinct town borders versus density gradients, commercial nodes versus corridors, mixed-use versus separate-use, open space versus development and more. The process of considering alternatives and creating scenarios forces participants to learn about challenges and strategies in planning, but also to work with neighbors who may have very different opinions about how and where the community should grow.

This low-tech tool can then be integrated with high-tech tools to simplify analysis and strengthen the power of the mapping exercise. Maps can be digitized and entered into GIS, allowing the results from many groups to be synthesized and compared. Maps can be layered to show areas where there is general agreement or more varied opinion, and to provide analysis of each table’s results with respect to level of service for police, fire, schools, water and sewer, or other attributes. In the case of Berthoud, CO, map results were entered into CommunityViz and were then available for easy analysis and comparison.

Although many technical tools create opportunities for people to engage in meaningful ways, the simplest tools allow participants to literally get their hands on their town’s growth management strategies. The Chip Game may not produce flashy 3-D scenes and animated visualizations, but participants come away with arguably more important results. With the aid of little more than glue, scissors, and paper maps, citizens engage in dynamic discussions and difficult decisions and they leave with an increased understanding of planning, of community dynamics, and of the future of their communities.