Density, Housing Types and Mixed Land

Smart growth proponents suggest that the housing needs of low-income households can be better met by neighbourhoods of greater density, a greater variety of housing types and mixed land use than by neighbourhoods dominated by low-density, single-family homes. This research tests these relationships in two regions: one with and one without urban containment policies. The research provides evidence that neighbourhoods with a greater variety of housing types and residential density have a greater quantity of units affordable to very low-income renters and, at the same time, a greater quantity of units that are not affordable. An implication of the findings is that planners and growth management advocates should specify goals of housing types, in addition to density targets, when creating or updating comprehensive plans for future growth. A second purpose of this research is to test whether urban containment, a significant tool for preserving open space, alters the relationships between each of these three goals—density, a variety of housing types and mixed land use—and the quantity of affordable housing. Urban containment policies prohibit or discourage urban development outside pre-determined boundaries on the urban–rural fringe. Examples of these policies include urban growth boundaries, which prohibit development outside established boundaries, and urban service areas, which discourage development by prohibiting public infrastructure outside established boundaries