A Case Against Urban Planning in Traditionally Single-family Markets

Many suburban cities are currently undergoing some major changes which stand to go against the very nature of what it means to live in suburbia.
Cities, many of which are in Orange County, are creating development plans that call for high density, urban projects. In effect, cities that have traditionally offered single-family housing, are now testing the strength and popularity of urban, mixed-use projects by transplanting what one would normally find in downtown Los Angeles to a much smaller community.

The question, of course, is whether urban planning will work in these types of situations.

The city of Brea in Orange County recently debuted its South Brea Lofts running along Brea Boulevard just past the Birch Street Promenade (which the city considers its "downtown.") The project features live/work lofts, the second of this breed that usually offers office space at ground level and residential units above spaces. The idea would be to live where one works and vice versa. this style project was not the first of its kind for the city.

The first set of live/work spaces appeared when the Birch Street Promenade opened several years ago.

The greatest question any city ought to ask itself when thinking about urban planning is whether any given project fits the character of the city. And the meaning of this question would be, does it match what residents want and does it match what the city needs to revitalize itself?

The problem with bringing in mixed-use projects that intertwine living spaces with retail or office in suburban areas is that it does not fit what already exists. It's bringing in a type of development that is the complete opposite of what already exists.

Suburbia is associated with sprawling developments such as shopping centers and shopping malls. In addition, the areas tend to cater to single-family buyers along with some multifamily spaces (apartments).

Developers argue that urban planning is all that is left because cities are running out of spaces to build things (which, in effect, may be a clue that development may just need to slow it down). However, those that subscribe to that theory believe that there is a constant need for development when that really isn't always the case. Just because one can build high density projects, it doesn't necessarily mean one should.

The other issue with these so-called live/work lofts that tout these grand images of urban living is that they tend to be out of reach for most buyers. The South Brea Lofts have asking prices that begin in the $700,000's. When you think about it, you could buy a whole home for that price and live in an area where you have easy access to grocery stores, malls, etc. The same could be said for nearby Anaheim's downtown area where the Stadium Lofts are just as expensive and residents would be confined to the view, expensive eateries in that one area.

Now of course, some people say the incentive is that live/work spaces promote more walking and less use of cars. However, this is not always true. If a developer builds in a place not associated with high density, then all a city has is one project that may be urban in nature, but the surrounding area doesn't offer that same character such as grocery stores or the like to make living in that area easy for the residents to access without a car.

After all, everyone seems to keep pushing the mixed-use and pedestrian-friendly retail/residential centers as the new sort of "green" developments that push us all to walk more and live out of one particular pocket of a city. The problem is that these developments don't offer that -yet (meaning it may just take time) and they are entirely overpriced.