<p>Debates on urban density have long been shaped by a tension between quantitative and qualitative assessments – often treated as oppositional – prompting the search for ideal forms, thresholds, or indices defining optimal densification. Empirical evidence, however, consistently demonstrates that such models frequently underperform once implemented, producing uneven social, spatial, functional, or environmental outcomes across contexts. This paper advances the hypothesis that neither quantitative metrics nor qualitative indicators alone are sufficient to evaluate high-density environments, as density is inherently context-dependent and shaped by place-specific planning, design, and governance conditions. Drawing on an extensive review of secondary findings, this paper proposes a comprehensive procedural framework for the planning and assessment of high-density urban environments that integrates quantitative, qualitative, and contextual dimensions. Conceptualised as ‘integral density’, the framework reframes density as a relational and networked phenomenon shaped by urban form, spatial experience, socio-political conditions, and environmental performance, rather than as a fixed numerical value or a proxy for liveability. In contrast to existing density, liveability, or compact city indices, which typically privilege either measurable outputs or experiential qualities, the proposed approach embeds context as a constitutive evaluative domain. The framework introduces an assessment matrix capable of supporting both the conception and post-implementation appraisal of high-density environments, allowing density to be evaluated dynamically and comparatively across places and over time. By positioning urban design and spatial planning as mediating fields, the paper contributes a methodological toolkit that translates multidimensional density into actionable and context-sensitive insights, supporting adaptive, inclusive, and spatially coherent high-density urban development.</p>