Century Old Zoning Schemes Limiting Walkable Neighborhoods
(Source)
As urban populations grow and the impacts of climate change intensify, city planners, policymakers, and environmental advocates are increasingly scrutinizing traditional planning approaches and calling for change. Rising traffic congestion, the decline of affordable public spaces for leisure, and the growing demand for sustainable living options are driving calls for change. The concept of a “fifteen-minute city” has gained mainstream attention as an appealing framework to address these challenges, offering a future where residents can access all their daily needs—work, education, healthcare, and leisure—within a short walk or bike ride from home. However, this idea is not entirely new; it stems from the concept of “walkable neighborhoods,” popularized in the 1960s by Jane Jacobs’ urban studies revolution.
Many cities around the world, such as Paris and Copenhagen, as well as cities in the United States like Minneapolis and Portland, have begun adopting versions of this model. Proponents argue that walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods can reduce car dependency, lower carbon emissions, and improve overall quality of life. However, the path to realizing walkable neighborhoods is fraught with legal and political obstacles. Rigid state and local land-use and zoning laws, entrenched interests in the automotive and real estate industries, public suspicion of government control and surveillance, and fears of gentrification all add complexity to implementation efforts.
What is Urban Sprawl?
Urban sprawl is characterized by widely dispersed, low-density residential development, government-mandated separation of homes, shops, and workplaces, and a lack of centralized activity hubs where people live and work. It also features disconnected networks of small roads that funnel traffic onto high-speed, highway-like roads (“stroads“), leaving minimal safe space for pedestrians. In the United States, urban sprawl costs the economy over $1 trillion each year because it leads to higher expenditures on infrastructure, public services, and transportation. The costs of maintaining roads, sewer systems, garbage collection, and school transportation increase significantly when homes are spread out over large distances.
For decades, single-family home zoning and car-centric city planning have dominated urban development across much of the United States. A large part of the current legal framework for development grew out of the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA) created by the U.S. Department of Commerce in the 1920s. The SZEA laid the foundation for local governments to adopt the model of separating residential, commercial, and industrial zones. This has led to the construction of homes that are distant from workplaces, the placement of schools far from the neighborhoods they serve, and the separation of essential locations—like retail districts and communal “third places”—from both work and residential communities. Consequently, as commutes have lengthened, car dependency has increased, leading to a significant rise in carbon emissions and worsening public health concerns.
Car-dependent planning has also deepened economic inequality, cutting off low-income and minority communities without access to private vehicles from essential services such as employment, education, and healthcare. Currently, only 10 percent of Americans live within walking distance of frequent transit. The risks of isolation are also substantial for the elderly, who become reliant on others as they lose their ability to drive, even though they might have been able to walk to their desired destinations in a more pedestrian-friendly environment. Despite these challenges, state and federal governments have largely avoided addressing the legacy of outdated land-use policies, leaving local governments to bear the responsibility of updating these policies and managing the consequences on their own.
Mixed-Use
In contrast, urban visionary Jane Jacobs championed the development of flexible, mixed-use neighborhoods that integrate residential, commercial, and recreational spaces. These developments are designed to be walkable and encourage a live-work-play environment. Mixed-use developments can be planned or unplanned but the ultimate goals are to efficiently use space while offering conveniences like shops and services nearby, reduce the need for car travel, lower housing prices, and help limit urban sprawl. Contemporary reinvigoration of this concept has been seen in Carlos Moreno’s model of a “fifteen minute city.”
With more compact development, individuals drive 20 to 40 percent less, while enjoying both economic and health advantages. A report from Smart Growth America found that creating walkable, well-connected communities lowers initial infrastructure expenses, cuts ongoing service costs by an average of 10 percent, and generates significantly more tax revenue—up to ten times more per acre—compared to typical suburban layouts. Furthermore, the most sprawling U.S. cities were found to spend about $750 per resident annually on infrastructure, whereas the least sprawling cities only spend around $500 per resident.
Mixed-use developments also foster a stronger sense of community by encouraging social interaction in shared public spaces. They combat the isolation that long commutes and car dependency create, improving overall quality of life. Residents of walkable neighborhoods also benefit from increased physical activity, access to local businesses, and even enhanced public safety due to the “eyes on the street” effect, where pedestrian activity naturally increases vigilance against crime.
Zoning Challenges and Federal Spending
Existing state and local land-use and zoning laws effectively make it illegal to build walkable neighborhoods. In many U.S. cities, zoning laws restrict 75 percent of the city’s land to detached single-family homes. Traditional “Euclidean” zoning—named after the 1926 Supreme Court case Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co.—provided the legal foothold for separating residential, commercial, and industrial land uses and has long dominated urban planning in the United States. This approach contributed to the rise of car-oriented suburban neighborhoods, particularly after World War II.
Attempts to change zoning laws face intense resistance from residents who oppose increased density or fear that mixed-use developments will alter the character of their neighborhoods. These property owners have resisted zoning changes, perceiving them as a threat to their property values. This phenomenon, known as NIMBYism (“Not In My Backyard”), has led to legal challenges and delayed efforts to create more walkable, mixed-use communities.
Federal spending policy also plays an active role in perpetuating urban sprawl. For decades, government investments have been directed toward building highways and expanding road networks, resulting in more driving and more emissions. A well-documented phenomenon known as “induced demand” reveals that expanding highways to reduce congestion only encourages more people to drive, ultimately worsening traffic. This cycle of building “just one more lane” perpetuates car-oriented development and presents a significant obstacle to the creation of more walkable neighborhoods.
Concerns of Gentrification
Despite the prevalence of car-oriented development, a 2023 survey found that 79 percent of Americans find living within walking distance of amenities such as shops and parks important. Millennials, Generation-X, and Baby Boomers are the key market forces in these areas, with those aged 60 and older seeking to downsize into denser, more accessible neighborhoods. However, the limited supply of walkable communities—particularly those near public transportation—has significantly increased property prices. This rising demand, combined with restricted availability, has driven up housing costs, often pricing out lower-income residents and exacerbating economic inequality.
For those who are displaced or priced out, the result is not just a longer commute or higher transportation costs, but diminished access to the very things that make urban living desirable—quality schools, healthcare facilities, green spaces, and employment opportunities. This geographic separation further entrenches inequality, leaving lower-income communities isolated from resources critical to upward mobility, while affluent residents consolidate access to these walkable, well-serviced areas.
While expanding the number of walkable neighborhoods is essential to ensuring that supply adequately meets demand and drives prices down, there is a widespread concern that expansion could worsen housing affordability in the short-term. This tension between the desire for more walkable neighborhoods and the fear of accelerating housing costs complicates efforts to create more inclusive urban environments.
Reforming Zoning Laws
Despite these obstacles, there is growing momentum to reform zoning policies to allow for mixed-use development, enabling the market to act as a pressure-release valve to help alleviate the rising demand for homes and businesses in walkable areas.
One approach that has seen success is the adoption of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) codes, which focus on creating high-density, mixed-use neighborhoods centered around transit hubs. This is a planned zoning strategy aimed to provide easy access to public transportation while encouraging the development of walkable areas where residents can conveniently access jobs and amenities within a short distance. TOD policies have already proven successful in cities like Portland and Minneapolis, where zoning reforms have promoted urban density and walkability.
In 2018, Minneapolis set a significant example by eliminating single-family zoning and relaxing parking minimums, which previously required one parking spot per housing unit. Since these changes, there has been notable development of walkable, higher-density neighborhoods, with developers increasingly interested in building in the area. Similarly, California has passed legislation to reduce restrictions on housing development near public transit stations, further encouraging the growth of TOD projects.
Addressing Gentrification
Finding the right framework for each neighborhood is a complex process, and there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. Different approaches to regulating mixed-use development aim to mitigate potential downsides and ensure successful implementation.
To address the possibility of rent increases and gentrification as the development of more mixed-use areas are underway, planners should consider implementing affordable housing policies. These measures could include inclusionary zoning, density bonuses tied to affordable housing, affordable housing trusts, and other strategies designed to maintain equitable access to housing in these areas. These initiatives require a “light handed” and balanced approach to ensure that developers remain incentivized to invest in the creation of these areas.
Public Participation and Equity in Planning
Public participation plays a pivotal role in the success of mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods by ensuring that the planning process is transparent and community-driven. When residents are actively involved in shaping their neighborhoods—whether through public forums, workshops, or direct consultation—the resulting development better reflects the needs and desires of the community. Engaging residents also helps build trust between the community and developers, leading to greater support for projects that would otherwise face resistance. This inclusive approach makes the development of mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods more likely to succeed, as they are designed with the input of those who will actually live, work, and play there.
In addition, robust public participation can help alleviate concerns about government surveillance. In many cases, suspicion and conspiracy arise when people feel that decisions are being made behind closed doors or that projects are being imposed without their input. When residents are given a voice in how their communities are designed and managed, they are more likely to feel that their privacy is respected, leading to reduced suspicion of the government in these newly developed areas.
The Federal Government Is Still on the Hook
The federal government should take an active role in assisting localities to update their development codes and move away from outdated early 20th-century models. One possible approach is to convene a new advisory committee on zoning, composed of urban planners, policymakers, and experts on sustainability. This committee should offer modernized guidelines for localities, taking into account current trends on climate change, affordable housing, and the need for walkable, mixed-use communities.
Additionally, the federal government could provide financial incentives and technical assistance to encourage municipalities to adopt more flexible and forward-thinking zoning regulations. By fostering collaboration between local, state, and federal entities, this initiative could ensure that cities are better equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century while promoting economic growth, environmental sustainability, and social equity.
Conclusion
While the path to creating more walkable neighborhoods is riddled with challenges, the benefits make it an endeavor worth pursuing. As cities grow and climate change pressures mount, the need for sustainable, accessible communities is more urgent than ever. By embracing a more flexible and inclusive approach to urban planning, cities can not only reduce car dependency and carbon emissions but also foster stronger, healthier, and more equitable communities. While there may not be a universal solution, a shared focus on urban renewal can significantly improve how we live, work, and interact with our environments.
Suggested Citation: Petar Djekic, Century Old Zoning Schemes Limiting Walkable Neighborhoods, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, The Issue Spotter, (Oct. 30, 2024), https://jlpp.org/century-old-zoning-schemes-limiting-walkable-neighborhoods.
Petar Djekic is a second-year student at Cornell Law School. Originally from Serbia, he grew up in Rockville, Maryland. He earned dual Bachelor of Arts degrees in Government and Politics and Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from the University of Maryland. During his 1L summer, Petar interned at the Criminal Division Fraud Section of the U.S. Department of Justice. In his spare time, Petar enjoys skateboarding, playing tennis, and watching NBA basketball.