Land Use
by Griffin Beronio & Gianmarco Katz
What's the Problem?
Land use policy regulates the built environment through zoning, building codes, and urban planning. These policies affect virtually every aspect of life in local communities, including housing, jobs, schools, public space, public services, and transportation. Historically, municipal land use policies face little interference from state and federal governments. However, many communities maintain car-centric, low-density development land use policies that reproduce social disparities and environmental harm. Compact, green, and mixed-use development reduces emissions by promoting multi-modal transportation while lowering energy demand, managing stormwater, expanding green spaces, and mitigating urban heat. To address these issues, local leaders must overhaul their land use policies. Key strategies include inclusionary zoning, transit-oriented development, and parking reforms.
What are People Currently Doing?
Inclusionary Housing Zoning
As communities change and grow, governments must work to make opportunities accessible and housing affordable for all residents. Inclusionary zoning requires or incentivizes developers to include affordable housing in new developments, helping to ensure mixed-income communities and expand access to opportunity. Cities like San Francisco and Denver have used inclusionary zoning to require all developments of a certain size to include a baseline number of affordable housing units; however, they also offer developers incentives for developments that reach standards on building height or unit size. Chicago’s Connected Communities Ordinance uses similar affordable housing requirements and zoning incentives to create more affordable housing near mass transit by increasing allowable building height and density, and creating new incentives for affordable and accessible housing near transit.
High-density zoning can help fight urban sprawl and drive efficient land by making public transit, services, and amenities more accessible to more people. Minneapolis banned single-family zoning, Sacramento broadened the range of housing types allowed within single unit and duplex dwelling residential zones, and Portland rezoned to allow more people to live near centers of cultural and economic activity. The Mayors Innovation Project’s Zoning for Diverse Housing Types Briefing Book details how cities like Tacoma, Eugene, and South Bend have legalized duplexes, triplexes, and other “missing middle” housing. These types of rezoning projects add density gradually, without altering the character of a neighborhood (see ProGov21’s Housing roadmap for more).
Mixed-use & Commercial Zoning
Mixed-use zoning is a useful strategy to combat low-density zoning. Mixed-use zoning co-locates businesses and housing, improving quality of life by creating vibrant, lived-in neighborhoods, reducing commute times, and replacing single-occupancy vehicle trips with foot, bike, and mass transit. Mixed-use zoning regulations in Colorado’s Jefferson County and development standards guidelines in West Alameda County, California provide examples of effective flexible mixed-use zoning policies that can be tailored to the character and needs of existing neighborhoods. Municipalities like Milwaukee are co-locating libraries, community centers, or cultural hubs within new housing and transit projects to create inclusive third spaces.
Zoning laws can also facilitate urban agriculture to promote public health, environmental sustainability, and economic prosperity. Cities like Los Angeles and New York have used equity assessments to prioritize investment in underserved areas, while others are embedding green infrastructure into zoning codes and development incentives. Los Angeles’ urban agriculture incentive zone program is a model ordinance that increases access to healthy food and their enhancement zone strategy utilizes proximity to LAX to fund public infrastructure. Additional creative zoning practices include Pink Zones that remove red tape for small businesses and Green Zones which drive sustainable economic development, reduce pollution, and promote healthy lifestyles.
Transit-Oriented Development
Transit-oriented development (TOD) coordinates transportation hubs and housing to create compact, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods and reduce automobile dependence. Cities like Chicago and the Bay Area encourage dense, mixed-use zoning near existing public transit corridors. However, investments in TOD have too often triggered displacement, gentrification, and rising rents—undermining the benefits of public transit improvements and exacerbating inequities. To address this, Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (ETOD) shifts the focus of TOD toward anti-displacement strategies by integrating affordable housing, tenant protections, and community wealth-building into transit planning.
The Strong, Prosperous, and Resilient Communities Challenge (SPARCC) recommends investments in ETOD offers guidance for crafting and implementing equitable transit policies that involve resident engagement, ensures access and safety, and aligns housing, health, and climate goals across agencies. The SPARCC Displacement Toolbox is a curated collection of resources — including webinars, working papers, case studies, and toolkits. Cities like Chicago, Denver, San Jose, and Atlanta have implemented locally tailored ETOD initiatives—such as affordable housing trust funds, community benefits agreements, and land acquisition programs—that ensure development near transit serves and stabilizes vulnerable residents rather than displacing them. Additionally, the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s EDOT tool creates location-specific projections on the impact of TOD policies on housing, jobs, transportation access, and local revenue.
Sprawl and car-centric development in the United States has led to excessive parking mandates that raise land costs and discourage sustainable travel, and is one of the primary impediments to equity in land-use. Due to this car-centric nature of urban planning in the United States, there is more parking space than registered vehicles. This over-allocation of land to parking spaces creates cities built to accommodate a few high-demand days out of the year at the expense of day-to-day mobility. Local governments should aim to eliminate minimum parking requirements near transit, allow developers to match parking to demand, promote alternatives like biking and ride-share, and support more affordable, resilient, and transit-oriented growth. Cities like Honolulu and Minneapolis have eliminated minimum parking requirements and allowed businesses and developers to make their own determinations of adequate parking provisions. Seattle’s reduction of parking minimums saved the city an estimated $500 million by reducing construction costs, capturing some of this value through increased commercial redevelopment. San Rosa, Austin, and Houston coupled parking management strategies with TOD programs by strategically pricing parking and devoting increased revenues to TOD initiatives. This report by SPARCC on equitable parking and TOD strategies and the Department of Transportation’s guide to parking pricing and associated case studies are examples of successfully implemented reforms.
Taking it to the Next Level
Land banks are public or non-profit entities that buy and aggregate distressed properties as both investments and strategic resources for community development. Denver leads the nation in acquiring low-value properties near planned transit infrastructure, allowing the city to capture increased property values and create affordable, transit-adjacent housing. The Denver Urban Land Conservancy strategically purchases vacant and delinquent land near future transit routes for future development. The City of Madison Land Bank was used to purchase underutilized land for mixed-use development, creating new housing and jobs while raising nearby property values. Detroit and Kansas City use land banks to reduce barriers to homeownership by purchasing homes for resale as affordable housing and for the creation of public green spaces and gardens. Seventeen states currently have legislation enabling land banks, with more on the way. See the Center for Community Progress’ National Land Bank Network for technical assistance and more resources. The Center for Community Progress offers a variety of resources on, and guidance on strategic code enforcement, and successful examples of vacant land stewardship; like in West Sacramento where the municipal government helped along the transformation of vacant lots into urban farms — boosting food access and supporting local schools and restaurants, fostering local economic development (see ProGov21’s Recreation roadmap for more). Smaller cities are uniquely positioned to lead on climate resilience and equitable development by aligning land use and water planning, leveraging vacant land, and modernizing outdated zoning codes. Strategies like scenario planning, performance-based zoning, and green infrastructure — paired with regional partnerships and data-sharing across agencies — can reduce environmental degradation and revitalize neighborhoods.
Allies, Advocates, and Advisors
Mayors Innovation Project, our sister organization, is a national learning network for mayors committed to shared prosperity, environmental sustainability, and efficient democratic government.