Abstract :
Problem: Literature advocating compact development and mixed uses frequently claims that this form of development supports a higher quality of life, yet the empirical basis for this claim is weak.
Purpose: I assess the relationship between physical form and quality of life using neighborhood satisfaction as an empirical definition of quality of life.
Methods: I examine the effects of block and neighborhood housing density, land use mix, the mix of housing structure types, and street network connectivity on residentsʹ ratings of neighborhood satisfaction. Using a multilevel dataset that combines individual household information with neighborhood contextual variables, I compare the Charlotte, North Carolina and Portland, Oregon metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), which have very different development patterns and land use policies.
Results and conclusions: At the neighborhood level, I find density and mixed land uses to be associated with higher neighborhood satisfaction in Portland, but lower neighborhood satisfaction in Charlotte. At the block level, however, I find blocks that are exclusively single family detached housing to be associated with higher neighborhood satisfaction in both MSAs. These findings suggest that the influence of compact development and mixed uses on residentsʹ quality of life depends upon the context, and may be sensitive to the spatial scales at which urban form is examined.
Takeaway for practice: Planners should understand that strategies promoting compact development and mixed uses will have different consequences in different contexts, and should pay careful attention to the appropriate spatial scale for implementing such policies. I conclude that compact growth and mixed uses improve quality of life by contributing to higher levels of neighborhood satisfaction, though they may not succeed in low density metropolitan areas. I conclude that in considering such development, planners should: rely on evidence to identify appropriate strategies; learn how to create conditions that foster urban amenities and discourage urban problems; pay attention to factors that complement the appeal of compact and mixed environments; and consider the possibility that the market will not tolerate mixing different housing types at a fine grain for the purpose of achieving higher density and diversity.
Research support: This research was supported by a dissertation research grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of City and Regional Planning, Cornell University.
