Time for new thinking: residential
above retail in a pedestrian setting

10-1. MIXING LAND USES
Municipal zoning in the United States dates from the early decades of the twentieth century. A key aim then was to separate different and conflicting land uses; everyone saw that development types had become overly mixed and that there was friction between many of them.

For instance, delivery trucks arriving at the market were disagreeable to adjacent residences. Or industrial smoke and noise were not conducive to maintaining residential property values. Why not use the potent new tool of a zoning map to put businesses and industries well away in their own districts, away from housing, and vice versa?

As in other states, planning and zoning officials in Connecticut spent decades sorting out the often random land use mix, directing land uses such as residential, commercial and industrial to locations where they were physically separated and fully compartmentalized.

However, hindsight has shown that some careful mixing, especially between moderate density housing, small offices and modest retail, would have been a good idea all along. The separation movement went too far.

The record also shows that since 1950 better sanitation, stricter pollution limits, and other factors have eliminated many of the public health risks of mixing residential with commercial development.

It was in 1961 that Jane Jacobs' influential book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, arguing that the zoning ban on the mixing of uses should be modified, was the catalyst that led to rethinking on mix.

By this time it was also obvious that traditional land use mixing in historic pre-zoning New England village centers was not a problem, and property values there remained high. And problematically, these model areas could not be recreated or extended with today's segregated zoning districts.

Some revisions to zoning maps and accompanying regulatory texts are now justified. But realistically, in the Housatonic Valley Region the development pattern at this point is too mature to be dramatically revised; separate zoning districts will remain dominant.

Still, newly authorized mixed uses should play an increasing role in some locations that are still developing or already redeveloping. The preference should be for locations that strengthen designated activity nodes and transit potential, not linear highway locations, where the advantages to the community of mixed use are weak.

Uses allowed in the Region's new mixed use zones may be diverse. But they should not reflect in microcosm every other type of zone in the municipality. Rather, the uses allowed in the mixed use zones must be carefully screened to be complementary and interdependent.

Overview of zoning patterns in southwestern
Connecticut, with the Housatonic Valley Region at left

Commercial and industrial zones are combined as red. Orange, buff and pale
yellow indicate descending intensities of residential zoning. Before 1920 there
was little control of the mixing of land uses. Then from 1920 until 2000 uses
were forcefully separated by zoning. Since 2000 the trend of some
modest remixing under controlled conditions has accelerated.

The selective remixing idea has moved sufficiently into the mainstream that the 2005 update of CT State Statute 8-35a guiding the contents of HVCEO's regional plan added a requirement that “the regional plan shall identify areas where it is feasible and prudent to have compact, transit accessible, pedestrian-oriented mixed use…and to promote such development patterns."

Some of the advantages of local mixed use as seen by HVCEO at the regional level:

--- Mixing land uses, preferably in community centers or development nodes, allows for a more diverse and sizable population and commercial base for supporting public transit. Simply, a higher percentage of those living in higher density subcenters use transit than those living in lower density outlying areas, because density is the key factor for creating demand for any transit system.

--- Mixing land use is an energy conservation strategy. The book Energy Planning and Urban Form by geographer Susan Owens found that the single most important factor affecting the relationship of urban form and transportation energy requirements is the physical separation of activities, determined by both density and the degree to which mixing of land uses is permitted.

In other words the density allowed by local land use regulations, coupled with the degree to which land uses are intermixed so energy costs can be reduced, are prime determinants of how much energy our communities use.

--- Mixed use can enhance the vitality and security of an area by increasing the number of hours that people are in public places. The business and investment communities have long recognized the benefits of placing housing nearby to attract more people to their shops.

--- Complementary and interdependent mixed uses promote convenience, making it easy to run errands, socialize and meet basic needs without always using a car. Often apartments or offices are located above retail spaces. Small but elegant public open spaces are also an important asset.

--- Proper lighting, safety and aesthetics can be incorporated into mixed use design to make people feel comfortable walking between the railroad station or bus transit center, residential areas, and commercial areas.

--- With mixed use, "shared parking" becomes viable. This is defined as parking that is proximate to and utilized by two or more uses but contains fewer than the required number of spaces for both uses standing alone. Yet it is adequate for the two uses on account of variable peak demand times for each use.

Some of the disadvantages:

--- As most development traditionally has been single use, many development and financing professionals view single use as a safer and more acceptable means to conduct business.

--- Professional planning talent is needed to write an appropriate mixed use zoning ordinance and guide developers in its application. This is not available in some municipalities. Connecticut state agencies in particular need to gain experience in working with each other and the private sector on complex mixed development efforts.

--- There is resistance to the change represented by mixed use development from members of the community which is often reflected in the reaction to such developments as part of the review process conducted by local land use agencies.

In 2005 the Town of Redding received a National Award for
Smart Growth Achievement from the U.S. EPA for allowing the
remixing of land use in its Georgetown Redevelopment Project.
A new rail station on the Danbury Branch Line was included.

Today an innovate type of mixed use is derived from a regulatory technique known as Form Based Zoning.

This new regulatory format focuses primarily on building exteriors, placement of structures on lots, and the nature of streets and public areas. Land use is then considered secondary to these design concerns. Form based codes are very place specific and usually regulate at the neighborhood scale or smaller.

10-2. INVENTORY OF TOWNS
CURRENTLY ALLOWING MIXED USE
According to a consultant study by HMA, Inc., “In the Housatonic Valley Region the zones that specifically call out ‘mixed use buildings’ as a permitted use are relatively few. However, there are many zones that do allow for a mix of uses within their boundaries, and there usually are no statements in the regulations that say that you can’t do a mixed use building in one of these zones.

HMA also listed the zones in the Region that are most favorable to mixed use buildings. Some of the zones, such as the ones in Ridgefield, are very specific; while for others you must consult details in the individual zone texts to determine that such buildings are possible:

Danbury: RMF-10, RMF-6 and RMF-4 zones.

New Fairfield: BC zone.

New Milford: B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, VCD, TLD, I/C and RT202 zones.

Newtown: B-1, B-2, HCDD, SHDD and SMVDD zones.

Ridgefield: B-1, B-2 and B-3 zones.

10-3. DESIGN GUIDELINES
FOR MIXING LAND USES
The design guidelines used by Brookfield for planning its Brookfield Village Center provide an excellent model for mixed use planning in other municipalities, with variations as needed:

Require a Mix of Uses
-- Include a mix of residential, commercial, retail and recreational uses.
-- Ground floor areas along Federal Road shall be active uses, primarily retail.
-- Second and third level floor areas will be a mix of residential and office.
-- Integrate parking, loading, and service areas accessible to all properties.

Encourage Shared Parking
-- Provide adequate parking to support retail, residential and office using parking ratios of approximately 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
-- Create public private partnerships to manage the parking.
-- Create time limited, diagonal on street parking on both sides of Federal Road.
-- Create parking on one side only of the side streets.
-- Identify appropriate locations for municipal parking lots in the rear of buildings available for shoppers, employees, and residents.
-- Size and locate parking lots to accommodate multilevel parking structures.

Create Intimate Relationships
between Buildings and Streets
-- Maintain a 3:1 building to street ratio with two and three story buildings.
-- Set back buildings between zero and ten feet from the edge of the sidewalk.
-- When the zero setback line is not utilized, the setback shall include public/private space with landscaping and/or tables, chairs/benches, and other pedestrian oriented amenities.

View of proposed Brookfield Village
Center along Old Route 7 in Brookfield

Protect the Pedestrian Environment
-- Provide sidewalks throughout the Village.
-- Allow for tables, chairs, and temporary display racks along sidewalks.
-- Provide bicycle parking.
-- Install traffic calming devices along Federal Road.
-- Provide ample public spaces for resting and other passive activities.
-- Provide restrooms for the public.
-- Require ground floor windows to be active.

Transportation, Circulation and Pedestrian Access
-- North - south auto, transit, and bicycle traffic primarily along Federal Road.
-- Side streets primarily one-way streets.
-- Control access onto Federal Road by prohibiting left turns and limiting curb cuts.
-- Provide bus shelters on both sides of Federal Road at the HART bus stops.
-- Consider a rotary at the gateway to the District.
-- Prepare for the possibility of rail passenger service from New Milford to Norwalk.
-- Identify an appropriate location for a commuter parking lot connected to the rail line by a pedestrian bridge over the Still River.

Provide Manageable and Attractive Landscaping
-- Street trees should provide a sense of enclosure between the building frontage and the street. -- Chose trees that will reach a maximum height of between 25 and 40 feet, with an average distance between trees of 25 to 40 feet.
-- Chose trees that are able to withstand a wide range of urban stresses, are shade producing and attractive.

Furnish and Light the Streets
-- Place benches every 100 to 200 feet, particularly at areas of activity.
-- Place wastebaskets every 300 to 500 feet, particularly at areas of activity.
-- Place lighted bollards (short vertical posts) as appropriate.
-- Install down-shielded lighting elements, 15 to 25 feet in height, which are architecturally compatible with the design elements of the buildings.

10-4. RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR MIXED LAND USE
GOAL: Reintroduce into municipal zoning codes some controlled mixing of compatible land uses in select locations, preferably within community centers and development nodes.

Use this technique as part of transit oriented development to increase the market for bus and rail passenger service.

--- 1. INTRODUCTION --- 2. MAP OF GROWTH --- 3. WATER SUPPLIES ---
--- 4. WASTEWATER --- 5. TRANSPORTATION --- 6. GLOBAL WARMING --- 7. HOUSING ---
--- 8. ECONOMY --- 9. OPEN SPACE --- 10. MIX LAND USE --- 11. TOD --- 12. PEDESTRIAN ---