Mixed-Use Development

The Trend: Mixed-Use Development

Until recently, seeking an alternative to the segregated landscapes of suburbia resulted in few options. Neighborhoods where residential units adjoin retail and work spaces or occupy buildings within blocks of homes and where walking or public transit is a viable option are not the norm. Zoning resolutions shifted the trajectory of development away from compact, mixed land uses beginning in the late 19th century. By the late 20th century, the United States was a suburban nation; defined by single-family homes located in expansive walled-off subdivisions, neighborhood retailers congregated in strip centers, larger retailers assembled in suburban malls or “big-box” centers, and employers occupied campus-style office and industrial parks.

Suburban landscapes segregated according to land uses and being connected by highways, freeways, and frontage roads represent the accepted standard in municipal planning. Yet the nonstandard, nonsegregated ideal, expressed through the recent rehabilitation or development of multiuse buildings and mixed-use communities, suggests that the notion of mixing has gained popularity at the beginning of the 21st century. Amid constituent complaints about traffic congestion, housing affordability, and the loss of natural resources, civic leaders are advocating this ideal via smart-growth planning principles that promote compact communities with higher densities, the mixing of building types and land uses, and the availability of different forms of transportation. Consumer demand for housing in mixed-use settings demonstrates a shift in individual household preference as well. The reemergence of mixed-use landscapes is interesting as it one day may encompass a larger share of U.S. housing stock.

Suburban Model of Development

As zoning became popular throughout major cities at the beginning of the 20th century, it also became a tool to ensure a specific economic and social future for a city. During the post–World War II recovery and mass suburban building boom, municipal leaders drew upon zoning for comprehensive master plans, segregating large areas of land for single land uses to avoid the mixing associated with the grim conditions of the industrial era and to ensure a desired level of municipal revenue.

Seeking profit through the development of higher tax-producing properties, such as sizable single-family homes on large lots, cities also used zoning to direct social outcomes. In practice, large swaths of land are zoned for a single use. Planner and property owners argue that maintenance of property values necessitates the development of proximate properties of similar or greater value. The practice leads to the exclusion of other property types such as affordable forms of housing and, thereby, lower income households. The segregation of land uses through zoning to protect property values and ensure higher tax revenues therefore also standardizes the segregation of populations by socioeconomic status.

...